JUDGMENT G.C. Bharuka, J. The present writ application has been filed by the sole petitioner assailing the order dated 29.3.1982 (Annexure-7) passed by the respondent D.C.L.R. by which he has declared that respondent no. 4 is an under-raiyat in respect of the lands in question. This order has been passed pursuant to a purported proceeding under section 48B of the Bihar Tenancy Act, 1885 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The appeal preferred by the petitioner also failed. The appellate order is Annexure 8 to the writ application. 2. One of the points raised by Mr. Narayan Singh, the Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, is that since in this case the Board was not constituted in accordance with the requirements of section 48B of the Act, therefore, all consequential proceedings and orders are null and void. The basis of his assertion is that though initially the Board was constituted as required by sub-section (4) of section 48B but the Panch of the petitioner did not participate in. the proceeding at all. The proceedings had continued for more than two days and therefore, as required under sub-section (5) of the said section, it was incumbent upon the Chairman to get another suitable person appointed as the Panch on behalf of the petitioner. According to his submission, since this basic requirement with regard to the constitution of the Board was not fulfilled, therefore, the purported Board had no legal existence and the efforts to make settlement or determine the claim of the parties were of no legal consequence. 3. On the other hand. Shri Sheo Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4, has submitted that no doubt the Board was not properly constituted but still under the scheme of section 48B, the D.C.L.R. was himself competent to decide the issues. 4. After hearing the parties, I am of the considered opinion that the submissions advanced by Mr. Narayan Singh should be accepted. In my view, since the Board was not properly constituted, as is admitted by both the parties, therefore, the orders passed pursuant to the provisions of section 48B are illegal and without jurisdiction. 5. Accordingly, I quash the orders, as contained in Annexures 7 and 8 to the writ application. There will be no order as to cost.