Raj Kumar Yadav and Others vs State of Bihar and Others

S.N. Jha, J.—This writ petition by the under-raiyats arises, from the order by which their application u/s 48E of the Bihar Tenancy Act has been rejected. It appears that on receipt of the application the D.C.L.B. Bhagalpur exercising powers of the Collector under the said Act, constituted a Board and referred the dispute to it for resolution. On the ground that the Board did not submit its report within a period of six months, the D.C.L.R. recalled the proceeding in terms of Section 48E(10) of the Act and proceeded to decide the same. He called upon the parties to lead evidence and eventually rejected the application by the impugned order.

Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that even in cases where the proceeding is recalled by the D.C.L.R. he is required to make endeavour for amicable settlement between the parties as expected of the Conciliation Board, and that having not been done in the present case the impugned order is liable to be set aside. He relied on the decisions of this Court. Counsel for the landlord-Respondent could not point out from the ordersheet of the case that any attempt was made by the D.C.L.R. for amicable settlement between the parties. That being the mandatory requirement of law I have no option but to quash the impugned order.