Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. This is an appeal under Section 147 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation challenging the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Nowgong, dated 11-12-51, whereby he ruled out an objection raised by the appellant to the realisation of a certain amount from him as arrears of land revenue on a requisition made by the Divisional Forest Officer, Nowgong.

2. The facts leading to this appeal put shortly are as follows: The appellant entered into a certain contract for supply of bamboos to the M. E. S. Camp at Nowgong and submitted a bill for Rs. 6,240/- but before the bill reached the M. E. S. authorities, the appellant received by way of accommodation Rs. 3,200/-from the Divisional Forest Officer, Nowgong, by executing an indemnity bond on 22-12-45 the relevant portion of which runs as follows: "I do hereby declare that I shall refund to the Divisional Forest Officer, Nowgong Forest Division if called upon by him to do so Rs. 3,200/- (Rupees three thousand and two hundred only) received by me in payment of bill No. HG/22 dt. 22-12-45."

3. The Divisional Forest Officer, Nowgong Forest Division wrote a letter to the Deputy Commissioner, Nowgong, on 29-5-50 requesting him to realise Rs. 3,200/- from Babu H. S. Purkayastha of Itachali, Nowgong (Assam) under Section 75 of the Assam Forest Regulation as arrears of land revenue. The letter describes in short how the appellant Himangshu Sekhar Purkayastha received the money from the Divisional Forest Officer and that the Government has asked the Divisional Forest Officer to realise the money from the contractor as the military authorities refused to accept the bill as submitted by Purkayastha, and that the contractor has failed to refund the money as he promised and therefore, it had to be realised as money due under Section 75 of the Assam Forest Regulation.

4. On receipt of the letter of request from the Divisional Forest Officer, the Sub-Divisional Officer who acted for the Collector took necessary steps under Section 94 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation for realisation of the amount as arrear of land revenue by following the procedure as laid down in Chapter V of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation. Himangshu Sekhar Purkayastha objected to the realisation of the amount mainly on the ground that the amount covered by the indemnity bond could not be realised as arrear of land revenue as provided under Section 75 of the Assam Forest Regulation. His second objection was that even if this Rs. 3,200/- covered by the indemnity bond be a public demand as described in Section 3(6) of the Bengal Public Demands Recovery Act, 1913 which is applicable to Assam, the proper procedure as provided under that Act was not followed for recovery of the amount and as such, the proceeding before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Nowgong, for realisation of the amount was incompetent. The learned Sub-Divisional Officer overruled the objections. Against that order of the Sub-Divisional Officer, an appeal was preferred in the Court of the Deputy Commissioner, Nowgong, though in my opinion, it will be questionable whether an appeal would be competent inasmuch as both the Sub-Divisional Officer and the Deputy Commissioner exercised concurrent jurisdiction with regard to the realisation of the amount.