Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Being aggrieved by the order of the learned S.D.O., Sadar, Sambalpur, the present petitioners preferred an appeal before the learned A.D.M., O.L.R., Sambalpur which was registered as O.L.R. Appeal Case No.12 of 1989 (Annexure-2) and the said appeal came to be allowed (in favour of the petitioners) by order dated 16.04.1990 on the ground that the alleged transfer of land had been made on 27.04.1964, whereas the O.L.R. Act, 1960 came into force on 01.10.1965 and, therefore, the appellate authority came to hold that the provisions of O.L.R. Act, 1960 were not applicable for the said transfer for land.

Being aggrieved by the said order, the opposite party No.4 preferred a revision before the learned Collector, Sambalpur in O.L.R. Revision Case No.4 of 1990, whereby, the learned Collector, Sambalpur by his order dated 11.03.1994 under Annexure-3 was pleased to quash the order of the learned A.D.M., O.L.R., Sambalpur in appeal and affirmed the order passed by the learned S.D.O., Sadar, Sambalpur and directed restoration of the land in favour of the opposite party No.4 herein.

3. On the records of the proceeding, it appears that the present opposite party No.4 filed a petition under Section 23 of the O.L.R. Act, 1960 before the learned S.D.O., Sadar, Sambalpur, praying to set aside the sale made through the Registered Sale Deed No.1787 dated 27.4.1964 and for recovery of the possession of the disputed land. In such proceeding, the learned S.D.O., Sadar, Sambalpur vide his order dated 18.01.1989 in O.L.R. Case No.7 of 1986 under Annexure-1/1 came to hold that the sale of the disputed land in favour of the present petitioners was void as no permission for transfer as contemplated under Section 22 of the O.L.R. Act, 1960 has been taken from the competent authority and, therefore, the same was liable to be declared as void and the land in question was required in law to be settled in favour of the present opposite party No.4 under Section 23 of the O.L.R. Act, 1960.

6. The order of the learned A.D.M., O.L.R., Sambalpur was challenged by opposite party No.4 before the learned Collector, Sambalpur in O.L.R. Revision Case No.4 of 1990 and by judgment dated 11.03.1994 (under Annexure-3), the said revision was allowed, the order of the lower appellate authority (Annexure-2) was quashed and the order of the learned S.D.O., Sadar, Sambalpur (Annexure-1/1) confirmed by the learned Collector, Sambalpur. In the said revision, the present petitioners had raised similar grounds and the learned Collector, Sambalpur came to conclude that, though at the time of transfer of disputed land in question in favour of the petitioners on 27.04.64, the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 had not been promulgated, even then in the sale of the disputed land, was required to comply with the provision of clause-(b) Sub-Section(2) of Section 46 of the C.P. Tenancy Act 1898 (as amended by the Orissa Act XIII of 1953) which required prior permission for transfer of land held by member of S.T. to members of Non-S.T and such mandate of law was in operation. Hence the learned Collector concluded that, it was a mandatory requirement for the petitioner (opposite party No.4 herein) to obtain necessary "prior permission" from the competent authority before registering the sale deed and for effecting of lawful transfer of land to the opposite parties (petitioners herein) in the year 1964. Thus he concluded that it was amply clear from the facts of the case that Section 23 of the O.L.R. Act, 1960 would become applicable and consequently upheld the order of the learned S.D.O., Sambalpur and quashed the order of the lower appellate authority.