A. K. DUTTA, J. ( 1 ) - In Title Suit No. 339 of 1987 before the learned Munsif at Kalyani, District-Nadia, a question arose as to whether the respondent No. 4 herein is or is not a bargadar in respect of the disputed land. A reference was accordingly made by the learned Munsif under section 21 (3) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act (hereinafter shortened into Act) for deciding the said question. On the basis of the said reference, the J. L. R. O. concerned had submitted a report on 3. 6. 89. Subsequently, the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Haringhata, had also submitted another report on July 19, 1989, which was contrary to the earlier report submitted by the J. L. R. O. In the aforesaid circumstances, on writ application being filed by the writ petitioner, N. K. Mitra, J. by order dated 28. 8. 89, which was subsequently partly modified by order dated 14. 2. 90, had disposed of the same making it clear therein that the learned Munsif while disposing of the suit will take into consideration the report and/or decision arrived at by the J. L. R. O. , Haringhata, Nadia, submitted on 3. 6. 89, and not the subsequent report dated 19. 7. 89 submitted by the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer in the matter, for the reasons recorded therein. ( 2 ) THE respondent No. 4 had thereupon made an application for recalling the aforesaid orders dated 28. 8. 89 and 14. 2. 90 passed by N. K. Mitra, J. for the reasons stated therein. N. K. Mitra, J. by the impugned order dated 16. 8. 91, while refusing to recall the aforesaid orders, had made clear therein that if the applicant/respondent No. 4 prefers an appeal against the judgment and decree (which had been passed in the aforesaid Title Suit in the meanwhile) shall be at liberty to take all the points as taken in the application for recalling, and would also be permitted to use such an application as a additional evidence in that appeal and the lower appellate court in such a case will be at liberty to pass appropriate orders without being influenced and/or biased by any of the aforesaid orders dated 28. 8. 89 and 14. 2. 90. ( 3 ) BEING aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned order dated 16. 8. 8. 89 and 14. 2. 90. ( 3 ) BEING aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned order dated 16. 8. 91, the writ petitioner has preferred the instant appeal. ( 4 ) IN the nature of the instant matter the point emerging for consideration is : which of the two reports, one submitted by the J. L. R. O. , Haringhata, Nadia, on 3. 6. 89 and the other submitted by the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer on 19. 7. 89 is to be considered for deciding the question as to whether the respondent No. 4 herein is or is not a bargadar in respect of the disputed land. ( 5 ) SUB-SECTION (3) of section 21 of the Act provides that if any question as to whether a person is a bargadar or not is raised in course of any suit, case, appeal or other proceedings before any civil or criminal court the court shall refer it to the officer or authority concerned for decision. In terms of the provisions of section 21 of the Act, subject to appeal under section 19 of the Act the adjudication by such authority/officer would be binding upon the referring court, and the said court shall dispose of the suit, case, appeal or other proceedings in accordance with the decision communicated to it by the officer/authority concerned. The referring court cannot arrive at a conclusion on the question of barga relationship contrary to that of the officer or authority referred. The report communicating the decision of the officer or authority concerned is, therefore, not merely a piece of evidence, but the decision is binding upon the referring court. But if the report does not contain any decision the same would hardly be binding upon the referring court. So also if in a proceeding the officer or authority concerned does not conform to the principles of natural justice, e. g. failure to issue notice to the concerned parties and give them an opportunity of being heard, the same would be a nullity and it would be open to the civil court to overlook the report on such inquiry and to order fresh inquiry on the question of existence of relationship, as held in Dharmadas Pal v. Pulin Haldar, 85 Calwn 1141, with which we are in complete agreement. ( 6 ) AS regards the first report submitted to the learned Munsif by the J. L. R. O. , Haringhata, on 3. 6. 89 it would oddly appear there from that the matter had been "duly enquired by the C. I. ", and not by the officer or authority concerned, in gross violation of the specific provisions of sub-section (4) of section 21 of the Act. The aforesaid provision makes it obligatory for the officer or authority concerned to personally make such inquiry, as may be prescribed, after giving all the parties to the suit, case, appeal or other proceedings an opportunity of being heard. The enquiry and the report so submitted by the J. L. R. O. concerned cannot clearly be said to be according to law as such. That apart, the aforesaid report, as it is, would make clear that no adjudication had been made by the J. L. R. O, concerned and no decision had been arrived at by him on the question referred to by the learned Munsif under section 21 (3) of the Act. In the aforesaid report the J. L. R. O. concerned had merely expressed surprised "as to how the Settlement Department had recorded the name of the bargadar which remains clouded. " In the absence of any adjudication or decision arrived at by the officer or authority concerned on the question referred to him, the relevant suit could not clearly have been disposed of by the learned Munsif according to law on the basis of the said report. It was for the learned Munsif to consider whether the question should have been referred to the officer or authority concerned for fresh enquiry on the question of existence of relationship for adjudication and decision by him, instead of proceeding to dispose of the suit on the basis of the said report, as he did. ( 7 ) AS regards the second report submitted by the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Haringhata, Nadia, on 19. 7. 89 it is merely reported therein that the respondent No. 4, Ganesh Chandra Pramanick, is a recorded bargadar of the disputed land, who is in a peaceful possession thereof as a bargadar. ( 7 ) AS regards the second report submitted by the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Haringhata, Nadia, on 19. 7. 89 it is merely reported therein that the respondent No. 4, Ganesh Chandra Pramanick, is a recorded bargadar of the disputed land, who is in a peaceful possession thereof as a bargadar. It was also for the Trial Court to satisfy itself as to whether there had been any adjudication by the officer or authority concerned and decision arrived at therein according to law on the basis of the reference made to it under section 21 (3) of the Act. If not, the learned Munsif could have overlooked the said report and ordered fresh enquiry on the question of existence of relationship in terms of the foregoing discussions. It is also open to the Civil Court to direct fresh enquiry if the principles of natural justice has not been complied with by the officer or authority concerned. But if there had been adjudication by the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer and decision arrived at by him according to law on the question referred to it, the same cannot, by any manner of means, be treated to be a mere piece of evidence. but the decision would be binding upon the referring court which would be obliged to dispose of the suit. case, appeal, ere. in accordance with the said decision. These, however, are matters to be considered entirely by the lower appellate court in the special and peculiar facts and circumstances of the matter (in case of any appeal being preferred against the judgment and decree of the trial court) ; and we do not propose to express any opinion on the merits of the matter and issue any guideline, while exercising writ appellate jurisdiction, as to how the Lower Appellate Court should proceed to dispose of an appeal, if so filed. The application and appeal be thus disposed of on the above observations. S. C. Sen, J.-I agree. Appeal disposed of. .