JANAK BHAGAT Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all the abovementioned three writ petitions, since a common question has been raised, therefore they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) THE petitioners in all three cases are claiming bataidari right with respect to the land in dispute. Therefore, on their applications under Section 48 E of the Bihar Tenancy Act, different proceedings were registered under Section 48E of the Act. It appears, the claim of the petitioners of bataidari right has been rejected by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, on the ground that they have failed to show that they are in cultivating possession of the land for more than 12 years.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the, petitioners, contended that from a bare reference to the provisions of Section 48E as well as decisions' in the case of Upendra Mandal and others v. State of Bihar & others (1989 PLJR 333) and CWJC No. 502 of 1986 and analogous cases, disposed of on 14.10.1996 (unreported), it would appear that the provisions of Section 48 -C of the Act has no relevance in the matter relating to the claim of the bataidari right under Section 48E of the Act. In other words, it is not necessary for an under raiyat to establish that he was in continuous possession of the land for 12 years.