3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that Revenue Misc. Case No.79 of 2013 wa
s suo motu initiated before the Sub-Collector, Kuchinda under the provision of Section 3-B of
Regulation-II of 1956 as the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners did not submit any inf
ormation regarding his possession over the land appertaining to Plot No.1147 under M.S Khata N
o.8 of Village Kukam measuring an area of Ac.0.90 decimals, which belongs to members of S.T C
ategory. In the said proceeding the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners has taken a sta
nd that he had purchased the aforesaid land from one of the R.T namely Kamara Naik, Cast : Gon
d through Registered Sale Deed after obtaining permission from the competent authority. Howev
er, he could not produce any permission order of the competent authority on the basis of which
he purchased and possess the land belong to the person of S.T category. Accordingly, the Sub-
Collector, Kuchinda by order dated 10.09.2014 directed restoration of the case land under Sect
ion 3-B of Regulation-II of 1956 in favour of Kamala Naik. Being aggrieved by the said order R
ev. Misc. Appeal Case No.2 of 2015 was preferred before the Collector, Sambalpur, which was dr
opped by the impugned order on the ground that the Collector has lack of jurisdiction.
