- (1.) This Rule is directed against an order dated 6.3.75 issued by the Bhagchas Officer by which it was determined that the opposite parties were the actual bargadars. On an application made by the bargadars the Bhagchas Officer informed the Revenue Officer to record the names of the bargadars. It appears that the impugned order was passed under section 19(B) of the Land Reforms Act. Mr. Chatterjee appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that unless the bhag cultivation is terminated by any person no order could be passed by the Bhagchas Officer for restoration of the land to the bargadar under section 19(B) of the Land Reforms Act. Reliance was placed upon a decision of this Court reported in (1) 68 CWN 112 (Mritunjoy v. S.D.O.). In that case it has been held by Banerjee, J, that it must have to be proved that there has been an illegal termination of cultivation of the land by bargadar. If that fact is not proved, then no action under that section can be maintained. In view of the above decision of this court, in my opinion, the Bhagchas Officer has got no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order. I have gone through the application by the bargadar which is annexure A to the petition. No where it is stated that the said bargadar has been evicted from the land. Accordingly, the impugned order is quashed. The Rule is made absolute without any order as to costs. I make it clear, if the opposite parties alleged bargadars are evicted by the owners in the meantime, they would be a liberty to make a proper application before the Bhagchas Officer for protection.;