M.Y. Eqbal, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. Rajeev Sinha, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants. No one appears on behalf of the respondents in spite of service of notice upon them.
(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.1.1997 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 5795 of 1994, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. For better appreciation, the impugned judgment and order dated 21.1.1997 is quoted herein below: After having heard learned Counsel for the parties, this writ application is being disposed of at the admission stage itself with consent of the parties. In this writ application the prayer is for quashing the orders dated 16.5.94 as well as 7.5.90 by which the petitioners have been non -suited from the lands, in question. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has challenged the impugned orders mainly on the ground that the same question which is invalid in this writ application was earlier decided by the authority against the private respondents as far as back in the year 1965 and the said order was also confirmed in appeal by the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Santhal Pargana vide order dated 31.1.66, a copy of the same are made annexure -2 and 3 respectively and as such, this writ application is barred by principle of res judicata, After going through the materials on record it appears that the issue involved in the earlier proceeding was not the same as involved in the instant proceeding. In that view of the matter, the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is wholly mis -conceived. That apart the findings arrived at by the courts below are all concluded findings of facts and, as such, I am not inclined to interfere with the same. This writ application is accordingly dismissed. The petitioners, who are appellants, filed the aforementioned writ petition challenging the order dated 7.5.1990 and 16.5.1994 whereby the Revenue Authority, at the instance of the respondents, set aside the order of confirmation dated 5.8.1961 passed in Bhoodan Confirmation Case No. 48 of 1957 -58.
(3.) THE facts of the case lie in a narrow compass: The land in question situates in village Chitarpoka in the district of Deoghar has been recorded in the survey record as Parti Kadim. The village Chitarpoka, Anch.il Manoharpur was under the Ghatwali Estate of the Ghatwal of Laxmipur Estate. The petitioners' case is that in the year 1953, the Ghatwal of Laxmipur Estate gifted the disputed land to late Acharya Vinobha Bhave in district Bhoodan Committee, Deoghar. The said form of gift was submitted to the Revenue Officer, namely, the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Deoghar for confirmation of the said 'Daanpatra'. A proceeding for confirmation was initiated being Bhoodan Confirmation Case No. 48 of 1957 -58. After following the procedure of notice and after verification of the 'Daanpatra', the Revenue Authority confirmed the sale vide order dated 5.8.1961. It is stated that no appeal or revision was filed against the aforesaid order of confirmation and the land stood vested in the Bhoodan committee. The petitioners and their predecessors -in -interest were given the land by issuing 'Praman -patra' and the rent was fixed by the Circle Officer, Manoharpur in the names of the tenants. It appears that in the year 1964 -65, one Amo Manjhi of village Chitarpoka created trouble in respect of possession of the said land, as a result of which, the tenant and Bhodan Committee filed petition in the court of Revenue Officer for ejectment of the said Amo Manjhi and others from the Bhoodan land. A case was registered being Ejectment Case No. 12 of 1964 -65. In the said case, order was passed on 30.9.1965 evicting the said trespasser from the land. Against the said order, Amo Manjhi and nine others filed Revenue Misc. Appeal No. 79 of 1965 -66 in the court of Deputy Commissioner, Santhal Farganas, which was heard by the Addt. Deputy Collector who finally dismissed the appeal vide order dated 31.1.1966.;