Judgment K. B. N. Singh, L. M. Sharma, J. 1. In this writ petition the petitioner prays for quashing of an order dated the 14th October, 1976 of the additional Collector, Hazaribagh, rejecting her objection filed under section 15 (3)of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), a copy of which has been filed as Annexure 1, as also the order of the Deputy Commissioner, hazaribagh, dated the 30th November, 1976 (Annexure 2), dismissing her appeal from the order contained in Annexure 1 as not maintainable. 2. Land Ceiling Case No.163 of 1973-74 was initiated against Deonarain singh, brother of the petitioner. In that proceeding the lands mentioned in Annexure 3 to the writ petition were declared to be surplus lands of Deonarain singh. The petitioner, who claimed to be an illiterate pardanashin lady having no notice of the case, filed an objection under section 15 (3) of the Act, alleging that 27 acres out of the lands declared to be surplus belonged to her as the same had been gifted to her by a deed of gift dated the 19th June, 1935 and since then she was in possession thereof, and in proof of which she has other relevant documents also. In view of this order that we propose to pass in this case, it is not necessary to give the details of the claim of the petitioner. The petitioners objection was rejected by the Additional Collector by his order dated the 14th October, 1976, against which, as mentioned above, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh. In the meantime, by virtue of clause 3 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1976 (Bihar Ordinance No.219 of 1976 ). published in the Bihar Gazette extraordinary, dated the 2nd November, 1976, sub-section (5) of section 15 of the original Act stood deleted, and this amendment came into effect from the date of publication of the Ordinance in the Bihar Gazette, i. e.2nd November, 1976. published in the Bihar Gazette extraordinary, dated the 2nd November, 1976, sub-section (5) of section 15 of the original Act stood deleted, and this amendment came into effect from the date of publication of the Ordinance in the Bihar Gazette, i. e.2nd November, 1976. The effect of this amendment is that on the publication of the notification under sub-section (1) of section 15 for acquisition of surplus land of a landholder, the right conferred on a person to file claim petition, claiming interest in the land specified in the notification, within thirty days of such publication, was taken away. 3. The short and important question that falls for consideration in the instant case is whether after deletion of the original sub-section (3) of section 15 of the Act by Bihar Ordinance No.219 of 1976, the petitioners right to file an appeal against an order under section 15 (3) of the Act also disappeared or not. Sec.30 of the Act which deals with appeals, reads as follows, after the amendment made by Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and acquisition of Surplus Land) (Amendment) Act, 1976 (Bihar Act 22 of 1976) : " (1) An appeal from any final order passed by any officer below the rank of the Collector of the district while discharging the functions of a collector under this Act shall lie to the Collector of the district or any other officer specially authorised in this behalf by the State government within thirty days of such an order ; " (2) An appeal from any final order passed by the Collector of the district shall lie to the Board of Revenue within thirty days of such order ; and " (3) An appeal under this section shall be heard and disposed of in the prescribed manner. " this amending Bihar Act 22 of 1976 was published in the Bihar Gazette a day earlier than Bihar Ordinance No.219 of 1976, i. e. on the lst November, 1976. From the above provisions it is apparent that there is a right of appeal from any final order passed by any officer below the rank of the Collector of the district while discharging the functions of a Collector under this Act to the Collector of the district or to any other officer specially authorised in this behalf by the State Government. There cannot be any manner of doubt that the order (Annexure 1) passed under section 15 (3) of the Act, which subsection was subsequently deleted by Ordinance no.219 of 1976, against the petitioner was a final order passed by the Additional Collector discharging the functions of the Collector under the Act. The right of appeal from such an order has not been taken away either by the amending Bihar Act 22 of 1976 or by Ordinance No.219 of 1976. Deletion of sub-section (3) of section 15 from the present Act is not with retrospective effect, but it is prospective, that is to say, from the date Ordinance No.219 of 1976 was published in the Bihar gazette The view we have taken gainst support from the following observations made by a Bench of this Court in Krishna Kumar Rai and others V/s. The State of Bihar and others, (C. W. J. C.121 of 1977 decided on the 17th March, 1977) : "it was contended on behalf of the State that section 15 (3) of the Act has now been deleted and that the Collector has no jurisdiction now to entertain and hear objection under section 15 (3) of the Act. This may be true so far as cases arising after 2.11.1976 are concerned. But in the instant case, the claim application was filed before section 15 (3) of the Act was deleted. Sec.15 (3) of the Act has not been deleted with retrospective effect. The right to file claim petition is a vested right and it does not get obliterated merely because of subsequent deletion of section 15 (3) of the Act. " 4. In the result, the order of the Deputy Commissioner contained in annexure 2 has to be quashed and the matter has to be sent back to the Deputy commissioner for disposal of the appeal in accordance with law. The writ petition is accordingly allowed, the order as contained in Annexure 2 is quashed and the case is remitted to the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, for disposal of the appeal in accordance with law. In the circumstances of the cases, we make no order as to costs. Writ petition allowed.