Pratap Kumar Ray, J. - (1.) IN these revisional applications filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a common question of law is involved touching the maintainability of revisional applications under the aforesaid jurisdiction of Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure hereinafter referred to as the said Code, in view of effect of Sections 6, 7, 8 and 9 of West Bengal Land Reforms Act and Tenancy Tribunal Act, 1997 as has been urged by the learned Advocates of the respective Opposite Parties, in the different pending cases herein. It is contended by the learned Advocates for the Opposite Parties that in terms of Sections 7, 8 and 9 of West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal Act, 1997, hereinafter for brevity referred to as Tenancy Tribunal Act, a complete bar upon this Court has been imposed to entertain any revisional application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure as arose challenging the order of learned District Judge exercising jurisdiction under Section 9(6) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, hereinafter for brevity referred to as Land Reforms Act. It is contended that the District Judge who was vested with the power and jurisdiction to decide the appeal arose out of preemption application is not a Court and/or a Tribunal but a persona designata and accordingly is an authority in terms of Section 6 of said Tenancy Tribunal Act. Hence, revisional applications are not maintainable. On the contrary, it has been vehemently argued by the learned Advocates appearing for the Petitioners in respects of different cases that learned District Judge while exercising the power under Section 9(6) of the Land Reforms Act is a Court and not an authority in terms of the definition of the authority under Section 2(b) of the Tenancy Tribunal Act and as a consequence thereof, West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal, hereinafter for brevity referred to as Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal has no jurisdiction, power and authority to decide the legality and/or validity of order passed by the learned District Judge exercising such power, in terms of Section 6(a) of the said Tenancy Tribunal Act. For effective adjudication of the said questions and in view of submission of the learned Advocates for the Respondents relying upon a judgment of Single Bench of this Court passed in Kasinath Mondal and Ors. v. Bani Ballav Biswas and Ors., 2001 W.B.L. 451 (Cal.), the matter is required to be dealt with in details on analysing the relevant provisions of the Act as well as the judgment passed by the Learned Single Judge of this Court in Kasinath Mondalw to have the answer on the point of maintainability. The first question to be considered whether the learned District Judge while exercising the power under Section 9(6) of the Land Reforms Act is an authority in terms of Section 2(b) of Tenancy Tribunal Act, Section 9(6) of the Land Reforms Act reads as follows: 9(6) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Munsif under this section may appeal to the District Judge having jurisdiction over the area in which the land is situated, within thirty days, from the date of such order and the District Judge shall send a copy of his order to the Munsif. The fees to be paid by the parties and the procedure to be followed by the District Judge shall be such as may be prescribed.
(2.) SECTIONS 2(b), 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the Tenancy Tribunal Act, being the relevant provisions for adjudication of this case are also quoted in extenso herein below: 2. Definitions: In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context; (b) 'Authority' means an officer or authority or functionary exercising powers or discharging functions as such under a specified Act; 6. Jurisdiction, power and authority of Tribunal: Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the Tribunal shall, with effect from such date as may be appointed by the State Government by notification in this behalf, exercise jurisdiction, power and authority in relation to - - (a) an order in original made by an Authority under a specified Act; (b) an application complaining in action or culpable negligence of an Authority under a specified Act; (c) an appeal against an order of the Mines Tribunal appointed under Section 36 of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 (West Ben. Act I of 1954) ; (d) adjudication of disputes and applications relating to matters under any provision of. a specified Act involving interpretation of any provision of the Constitution or of validity of a specified Act or of any other law for the time being in force ; (e) adjudication of matters, proceedings, cases and appeals which stand transferred from the High Court and other Authorities to the Tribunal in accordance with the provisions of this Act. 7. Exercise by Tribunal of jurisdiction, power and authority exercisable by court: Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the Tribunal shall, with effect from the date appointed by the State Government under Section 6, exercise all the jurisdiction, power and authority exercisable immediately before that day by any court including the High Court, except the writ jurisdiction under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution exercised by a Division Bench of the High Court, but excluding the Supreme Court, for adjudication or trial or disputes and applications relating to land reforms and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto and other matter arising out of any provision of a specified Act. 8. Exclusion of jurisdiction of courts: On and from the date from which jurisdiction, power and authority become exercisable under this Act by the Tribunal, the High Court, except where that Court exercises writ jurisdiction under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution by a Division Bench, or any civil Court, except the Supreme Court, shall not entertain any proceeding or application or exercise any jurisdiction, power or authority in relation to adjudication or trial of disputes or applications relating to land reforms or any matter connected therewith of incidental thereto or any other matter under any provision of a specified Act. 9. Transfer of case records from High Court: (1) All matters, proceedings, cases and appeals relating to land reforms and matter connected therewith or incidental thereto and other matters arising out of a specified Act pending before the High Court, except where a Division Bench of that Court exercises writ jurisdiction under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, on the date appointed by the State Government under Section 6, shall stand transferred to the Tribunal for disposal in accordance with the provisions of this Act. (2) Where any matter, proceeding, case or appeal stands transferred from the High Court to the Tribunal under Sub -section (1): (a) the High Court shall, as soon as may be after such transfer, forward the records of such matter, proceeding, case or appeal to the Tribunal in accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed ; and (b) the Tribunal shall, on receipt of such records, proceed to dispose of such matter, proceeding, case or appeal so far as may be, from the stage reached before such transfer or form any earlier state or de novo as it may deem fit: Provided that any interim order granted in a matter, proceeding or case by the High Court shall stand vacated on the expiry of twelve weeks from the date appointed by the State Government under Section 6 unless the Tribunal by an order varies, modifies or extends the same earlier on ah examination of the records of such matter, proceeding or case. (3) (a) All proceedings pending before the Mines Tribunal appointed under Section 36 of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 (West Ben. Act I of 1954, on the date appointed by the State Government under Section 6 of this Act, shall stand transferred to the Tribunal for disposal. (b) Upon such transfer, the records of such proceedings shall be forwarded to the Tribunal in accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed. Under Section 9(6) of the Land Reforms Act, it appears that being aggrieved by an order of the Munsif passed under Section 9 of Land Reforms Act, aggrieved party may prefer an appeal to the District Judge having jurisdiction over the area in which the land is situated. The wording that the District Judge of the area in question and the wording order of Munsif as appearing in the said Section are relevant factors and vectors as will lead a positive rider to the answer on the question of maintainability as raised. Under the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, there is no definition of word 'Munsif and/or 'District Judge'. Such definition can be available from the General Clauses Act. Under Section 3(17) of the General Clauses Act, the 'District Judge' has been defined as follows: 'District Judge' shall mean the Judge of a principal civil court of original jurisdiction, but shall not include a High Court in the exercise of its ordinary or extraordinary original civil jurisdiction.
(3.) UNDER the Bengal General Clauses Act, 1899, District Judge also has been defined under Section 3(12) of the said Act, which reads as follows: 3(12) 'District Judge' shall mean the Judge of a principal Civil Court or original jurisdiction, but shall not include a High Court in the exercise of its ordinary or extraordinary original civil jurisdiction.;