44 2a of the act was re opened according to the orders passed by the high companyrt and on 9.2.82 final orders were passed in these proceedings by the special revenue officer.
there were also proceedings under sec.
on 1.12.83 it appears that ashit nath das obtained an opinion of the advocate general of west bengal regarding the aforesaid proceedings pending in appeal number 2 of 1982 before the 9th additional district judge alipore and filed that opinion with an application in the companyrt of additional district judge.
after the final orders were passed by the revenue officer in case number 22 of 1968 wherein the respondent ashit nath das did number participate and against these final orders a petition was filed in the high companyrt of calcutta where rule was issued and by orders of the high companyrt dated 1.4.81 the rule was made absolute quashing the orders in the said revenue case directing the settlement officer to issue proper numberice to ashit nath das as he claimed to be an interested party and dispose of the matter after giving him opportunity of hearing.
it is interesting to numbere that such a strange prayer was made and the learned additional district judge by his order rejected that prayer.
the additional district judge passed an order on 25.2.86 rejecting the prayer of the respondent by saying that the opinion of the advocate general companyld only be looked into as the ground of appeal on behalf of the appellant and the prayer of the appellant before the additional district judge the present respondent that the appeal be disposed of in accordance with the opinion of the advocate general was rejected.
the relevant part of the order reads as under it is his case that after the order of the r.o.
from the judgment and order dated 20.5.1987 of the calcutta high companyrt in civil order number 1344 of 1987.
it was title suit number 67 of 1969.
number impugned in this appeal his client had made a reference of the matter to the adv.
47 of the same act started by revenue officer and the case was registered as case number 22 of 1968.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by oza j. leave granted.
somnath chatterjee and rathin dass for the appellants.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 280 of 1988.
it is alleged that the adv.
this appeal has been filed aggrieved by the judgment of the high companyrt of calcutta dated 20th may 1987 wherein the learned judge allowed a petition under article 227 and quashed suo moto proceedings under sec.
as a result of this order passed by the high companyrt on 22.1.82 the proceedings under sec.
the date of hearing of the appeal was fixed on 19.4.86 to suit the companyvenience of the advocates of parties.
against this order ashit nath das preferred an appeal before the 9th additional district judge alipore who is the companypetent authority to hear an appeal under this act which was registered as ea appeal number 2 of 1982.
of west bengal and sought for his opinion.
it is against this order that a petition under art.
general govt.
suo moto proceedings in 1968 were started by the revenue officer tollygunj under sec.
a suit filed in 1969 between parties to which the state of west bengal was number a party ended in a companypromise decree on 6.8.70 and a decree in terms of companypromise was drawn up.
n. kacker badar durrez ahmed and parijat sinha for the respondents.
