D.G.R.PATNAIK, J. - (1.) BOTH these cases are disposed of by this common order, since they involve common issues. In these writ applications the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order (Annexure -1) passed by the Commissioner, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka, (respondent No. 2) in Revenue Misc. Revision No. 130 of 1985 -86, whereby the earlier order dated 18.4.1985 (Annexure -2) of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dumka (respondent No. 3), passed in Revenue Misc. Appeal No. 338 of 1979 -80 and the order dated 13.1.1979 (Annexure -3) of the Sub -Divisional Officer (respondent No. 4), passed in R.E. Case No. 93 of 1977 -78, whereby rejecting the petitioner's claim of title to the lands in question by way of inheritance, were confirmed.
(2.) THE main question in these writ applications, is "whether the respondent authorities had jurisdiction under the San thal Parganas Tenancy Act to adjudicate upon the title of the petitioner over the lands in question - C.W.J.C. No. 12032 of 1995 (P) The facts of the case in this writ application in brief are that the lands under reference in this case were originally recorded in the name of one Suchita Mandlain under Jamahandi No. 51. She died issueless on 9.4.1976. Her husband had pre -deceased her. The lands in question were inherited by her from her husband. The petitioner happens to be the nephew of the lady, being the son of the lady's brother. The petitioner's father, Yogendra Mandal had come in possession of the lands and was using the same for agricultural purposes. While this was so a proceeding was initiated by the Sub -Divisional Officer, Dumka vide R.E. Case No. 93 of 1977 -78 under Section 42 of the Santhal Parganas Tenancy Act, for eviction of the petitioner and 46 others from the lands which were in their respective possession. In response to the notices, the petitioner had appeared in the proceeding asserting his claim of title over the lands on the ground that he had inherited the same from the recorded tenant Suchlta Mandlain. The petitioner's prayer was rejected by the Sub -Divisional Officer on the ground that he did not fall in the category of heirs of the deceased -tenant under the provisions of Section 15(2) of the Hindu Succession Act. Against the order of the Sub -Divisional Officer, dated 13.7.1989, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Additional Deputy Commissioner Dumka (respondent No. 3) vide Revenue Misc. Appeal No. 338 of 1979 -80. The petitioner's claim was rejected and the order of the Sub -Divisional Officer, Dumka was confirmed. Against the order of the appellate Court the petitioner had preferred a Revision before the Commissioner but here also, the petitioner could not succeed. C.W.J.C. No. 12033 of 1995 (P)
(3.) IN this writ application, the facts of the case is that a proceeding was initiated by the Sub -Divisional Officer, Dumka on the basis of an application filed by as many as 12 persons, who were residents of the Village -Ortara seeking praye for declaring the lands of Jamabandi No. 59 of Village -Ortara, as "Fouti" lands. Petitioner was one of the objectors in the proceedings.;