JUDGMENT : P.K. Misra, J. - The facts giving rise to the present writ application are as follows: The present opposite party No. 5 had filed an application u/s 36A of the Orissa Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). The present Petitioner filed Objection denying the claim made by opposite party No. 5. Thereafter, the Tahsildu allowed the application u/s 36A as pet order under Annexure-l. The present Petitioner filed O.L.R. Appeal No. 12/84. The appellate authority as per order contained in Annexure-2 allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the Tahsildar for fresh determination inter alia, on the ground: The learned Revenue Officer has studied all evidences produced before him by the parties in this case. He has referred to the report of the local Committee, but nowhere has it been categorically mentioned that the Petitioner was cultivating the case land as a bag tenant prior to commencement of the O.L.R. Act and continued as such after the commencement of the Act. This aspect is of vital importance for declaring some body as a raiyat in respect of the case land. Since this aspect has not been properly ascertained, the case is remanded to the lower court with direction to ascertain the period from which the present Respondent was cultivating the case land as Bag tenant and whether he is continuing to cultivate the said land in the same manner at present, After ascertaining this fact, he should dispose of the case in accordance with the provisions of law. Thereafter, the present opposite party No. 5 filed O.L.R. Revision No. 2 of 1994. The provisional authority allowed the revision, inter alia, on the finding: The findings of the Revenue Officer clearly demonstrate the existence of the tenancy and accordingly, it is not necessary to go into the timing of induction of tenancy. Similarly, the possession of the suit land and payment of bag dues by the bag tenant has been proved. Thereafter, the present Petitioner moved the Land Reforms Commissioner for making a reference to the Member, Board of Revenue. However, the said petition having been rejected, the present writ application has been filed. 2. The learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that before granting relief u/s 36A, it was necessary for the authority below to find out the date of induction of opposite party No. 5 as a tenant. However, the said petition having been rejected, the present writ application has been filed. 2. The learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that before granting relief u/s 36A, it was necessary for the authority below to find out the date of induction of opposite party No. 5 as a tenant. This submission is based on the ratio of the decision) of this Court reported in Kalicharan Paikaray and Another Vs. Benga Bewa and Others, It is evident that the Appellant authority had remanded the matter to the Tahsildar keeping in view the aforesaid decision. However, the provisional authority without considering the importance of the aforesaid decision has set aside the order of the appellate forum, In such view of the matter, the order of the provisional authority is quashed, and the matter is remanded to the Tahsildar for coming to conclusion about the date of induction of opposite party No. 5 as tenant. It is made clear that the finding that there is relationship of landlord and tenant between the Petitioner and opposite party No. 5 has not been disturbed and only the aspect to be considered is regarding the date of induction of opposite party No. 5 as tenant. The Tahsildar is required to find out if opposite party No. 5 was a tenant on the date of commencement of the Orissa Land Reforms Act to decide the matter keeping in view the observation of the Division Bench in the decision already noticed. This exercise should be completed by the Tahsildar within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order. Opportunity of hearing/adducing further evidence shall be given to both the parties. The Petitioner and opposite party No. 5 are directed to appear before the Tahsildar on 4th,September, 2000. This order shall be communicated to the Tahsildar. Requisites shall be filed by tomorrow. The writ application is accordingly disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. Writ application disposed of.