- (1.) IN pursuance of an order made by the State Government directing that a record of rights be prepared in respect of the District of Nadia, the Revenue Officer concerned prepared what he considered a complete record of rights and then the draft record as prepared by him was published on the 2nd July, 1955. The draft record as published did not contain determination of rent payable by the present petitioner, an intermediary within the meaning of the Act who was entitled to retain possession of any land under the provisions of section 6 (1) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953. After the preparation of the draft record, however, the learned Revenue Officer proceeded to determine the rent in compliance with the provisions of section 42 of the Act and in that connection he called upon the petitioner by notice to be present at his camp with all documents and papers for the purpose of the determination. The petitioner made its representation and after hearing the representation, the Revenue Officer assessed the rent at a figure which he thought proper. Aggrieved by this assessment, the petitioner preferred two appeals to the Tribunal purporting to be an act in the exercise of the right given by section 44 (3) of the Act. The Tribunal has held that the appeals do not lie.
(2.) THE petitioner now asks for this court's interference with the order of assessment as made by the Revenue Officer. His first ground is that the Tribunal is wrong in thinking that no appeal lies. Secondly, it is contended that, in any case the Revenue Officer acted without jurisdiction in determining rent after the publication of the draft record.
(3.) AS regards the first point, we are clearly of opinion that the Tribunal is right. Section 44 (3) gives a right of appeal only against an order made on an objection under sub-section (1) of that section. Objection under that sub-section can be made to any entry made in the draft record or to any omission there from. Whatever representation the petitioner made during the process of determination of rent under section 42 could not by any stretch of imagination be held to amount to objections within the meaning of subsection (1) of section 44 of the Act to any entry made in the draft record or to any omission there from. Consequently the assessment made by the Revenue Officer, can not be said to be on any objection under sub-section (1) of section 44. The Tribunal is right in holding that no appeal lies.;