The Revisional Authority came to hold that the claim of the respondents about their occupancy rights cannot be sustained and the institution being a public temple and in view of the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments dated 17.1.53, deciding the nature of the institution the Estate Abolition Collector rightly directed the settlement of land in favour of the deity.
The private respondents filed their objections pursuant to the numberice issued in the aforesaid proceeding inviting objections from the public and the respondents claimed their tenancy right in respect of the lands belonging to the deity.
86 OF 1984 stood disposed of by the Order passed by the Member, Board of Revenue dated 5.5.1987.
The High Court by the impugned Order set aside the order of the Collector dated 23.9.77 and held that the respondents have occupancy right in the land and would be entitled to remain in possession of the land in accordance with law.
Under the provisions of Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1952 hereinafter referred to as the Act a numberification was issued by the Govt.
The deity and the properties attached to it situate in the District of Dhenkanal, which was earlier a princely state and it became a part of State of Orissa after its merger in 1948.
The High Court by the impugned Judgment allowed the said writ petition having held that the respondents have acquired an occupancy right over the land in question.
The said revision case having been dismissed, the respondents approached the High Court invoking the jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.
of Orissa in Revenue Department on 27.2.68, declaring that the intermediary interests of Debottar Lakhrajs land in the District of Dhenkanal became vested in the State free from all encumbrances.
The appellant thereafter through the Executive Officer of the deity filed an application under Section 6,7 and 8 of the Act for the settlement of land with the deity.
The said Collector rejected the objection filed on behalf of the private respondents and rejected the claim of tenancy over the land and further directed that the lands in question be settled with the deity on fair and equitable rent.
454/74 stood disposed of by the Order of the Estate Abolition Collector dated 23.9.77.
Pursuant to the said order, equitable rent was assessed and gutta was issued to the appellant.
However, after expiry of seven years the said respondents invoked the suo motto revisional jurisdiction of the Member Board of Revenue, under Section 38B of the Act.
The said revision application which was registered as OEA.
Revision Case No.
The said proceeding which was registered as OEA Case No.
Though appeal is provided under the Act, the respondents did number prefer any appeal.
