SHYAMLAL PADENDRA DUTTA MLSRA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOR misapplication of the loan granted under the Land Improvement Loans Act, the Collector ordered the recovery of the loan from the appellant in a lump sum. An application for review was also rejected by him. The order of the Collector passed in review has now been sought to be challenged before the Board in appeal.

(2.) UNDER section 13 of the M. P. Land Revenue Code (hereinafter called the Code) the Collector is appointed to exercise powers and to discharge duties conferred and imposed upon him by the Code or by any other enactment for the time being in force. It was argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the Collector, while acting under an enactment other than the Code, is a revenue officer and any order passed by him is both appeal able and revisable as if it were passed under the Code itself.

(3.) IT was, however, submitted that the "Explanation" under section 46 of the Code is an innovation which did not appear in section 39 of the old Land Revenue Act, which governed Mirza Rashid Begs case. This 'Explanation' reads as follows: Explanation: -For the purpose of this section all Revenue Officers shall be deemed subordinate to the Board.