JUDGMENT S. Talapatra, J.:- Heard Mr. D.C. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Mr. J. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 4. None appears for the respondent No. 5 despite due notice from this court. 2. The grievance of the petitioners has emanated from the orders dated 09.05.2008 and 08.07.2008, Annexures 7 and 8 respectively to the writ petition. By the order dated 09.05.2008, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Amarpur, South Tripura has determined the respective claim over a plot of land which has been described as the alluvial land adjacent to the plot of the petitioners comprised in R.S. Plot No. 7773, Khatian No. 1724 of Mouja Amarpur under Birganj Tahasil Kachari. It has been claimed that the said alluvial land is part of the land described in the schedule lost by diluvion. However, the said claim has been denied by some members of the Muslim community of that area contending that the said alluvial land, newly formed and abandoned beds measuring 0.49 acre is used as the graveyard and they have buried numerous bodies in the said land. It appears that the order dated 09.05.2008, Annexure-7 to the writ petition, was passed on the basis of an Enquiry Report dated 22.06.2007, submitted by two Amins of the said Tahasil Kachari, Annexure-R/3 to the counter-affidavit by the respondents. The said report observes as under: It reveals that the land measuring 0.49 acre alluvial land located in the northern side of the Hal plot No. 7773 (under Amarpur Mouja which has shown as river in the map), (i) Sri Jatindra Das, (ii) Sri Shailendra Das, (iii) Sri Nani Gopal Das and (iv) Sri Phani Bhushan Das, S/O Lt. Pran Kanta Das of Rangkang are the illegal occupier of the said land since 22.06.2007 and a dwelling house with GCI roof and bamboo fencing just constructed by the occupants in the said land is seen. Dispute is over the possession of the said land only." [translation from Bengali as provided] 3. In pursuance to the order dated 09.05.2008, the Deputy Collector & Magistrate, Amarpur Revenue Circle has passed the order dated 08.07.2008, Annexure-8 to the writ petition, asking the petitioners to remove their newly constructed house alongwith the latrine and tube-well over the disputed land, which has been claimed as the graveyard, within three days from the date of receipt of that communication. 4. Mr. 4. Mr. D.C. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that under what authority the said Deputy Collector & Magistrate has passed the said eviction order is not at all intelligible. Apart that, Mr. Roy has submitted that by the order No. 2/252, dated 16.09.2000, Annexure-2 to the writ petition, the Government had allotted 0.860 acres of land in favour of the petitioners’ father. Since the alluvial land is on the southern boundary of the said allotted land and was lost by diluvion, the petitioners have got their right and title over the said land. Therefore, the impugned orders are entirely illegal and liable to be interfered with. 5. Mr. J. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 4 has submitted that the petitioners have made conflicting claims as regards their right over the said alluvial land. In the writ petition they have contended that by virtue of the provisions of Section 18(1) of the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act, 1960, hereinafter for short, ’TLR & LR Act’, since the alluvial land is formed adjoining to the southern boundary they have their natural right over the said land as that land was, as can be gathered from their averments lost by diluvion, but before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate they claimed their right over that alluvial land by virtue of an unregistered deed evidencing release of the possession by one Subhash Chandra Paul in favour of one of the petitioners, namely Nani Gopal Das and other two persons, namely Rani Bala Das and Minati Das. Mr. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 4 has further submitted, having referred to the said enquiry report dated 22.06.2007 that the said land has been in use by the Muslim community as their graveyard since long. Therefore, the petitioners cannot claim any right over the said land. That apart, Mr. Majumder has raised a jurisprudential objection as to whether this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution can be entertained by this court for a bundle of disputed fact has fallen for consideration. 6. Having appreciated the records so produced with the writ petition and the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents No. 1 to 4 as well as the submissions of the learned counsel, this court is entirely in concurrence with the submission of Mr. 6. Having appreciated the records so produced with the writ petition and the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents No. 1 to 4 as well as the submissions of the learned counsel, this court is entirely in concurrence with the submission of Mr. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 4 that the disputed fact of this nature cannot be adjudicated in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution, inasmuch as when the possession itself is under dispute. Without recording the evidence, merely on the basis of the enquiry report the possession cannot be determined. Apart that, the situs of the alluvial land and its period of formation or whether the alluvial land is formed of the land lost by diluvion is the component to be determined to address the dispute raised in this writ petition. But, at the same time, Mr. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is equally right when he has underlined that it cannot be had from the impugned orders that under which authority the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Amarpur or the Deputy Collector & Magistrate, Amarpur Revenue Circle have ventured to pass the impugned orders. It does not appear that they have exercised their power under Section 18(1) of the TLR & LR Act or under Section 17 read with Section 18(2) of the TLR & LR Act on considering the alluvial land has vested in the Government. It appears that it was a simple executive order on inquiry. Even if the said order has been passed for maintaining the tranquillity, but the eviction order cannot be passed unless it is shown that the Deputy Collector & Magistrate, Amarpur Revenue Circle has the authority to act as the Estate Officer or has the authority under Section 15 of the TLR & LR Act for evicting someone. 7. In the TLR & LR Act, the Revenue Officer does not hold the authority to evict someone from a private land when the dispute erupts between the two private individuals. The said power lies with the Revenue Officer under Section 15 of the TLR & LR Act when the khash land has been trespassed by a private individual. An appropriate proceeding as stated should have been drawn to settle the contentious issue over the right on the said alluvial land. The said power lies with the Revenue Officer under Section 15 of the TLR & LR Act when the khash land has been trespassed by a private individual. An appropriate proceeding as stated should have been drawn to settle the contentious issue over the right on the said alluvial land. But, in this case, the Deputy Collector & Magistrate while passing the order dated 08.07.2008 has not acted in terms of Section 17 read with Section 18(2) or Section 18(1)of the TLR & LR Act. As such, this is a case where a public officer has exercised the power which has not been conferred to or vested with him by any statute, which is therefore suffers from vice of the illegality. 8. Hence, the impugned orders are interfered with and quashed. The petitioners are given leave to institute an appropriate proceeding to establish their claim over the alluvial land as referred in this writ petition or otherwise, within a period of 3(three) months from today, if otherwise such proceeding is maintainable. 9. Till such proceeding as contemplated is set in motion, the status quo of the land in question shall be maintained by the petitioners and they shall not be allowed to convert it for any other purpose. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Amarpur, South Tripura shall keep vigil whether the status quo is maintained by the petitioners or not. If there is any breach, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Amarpur, South Tripura may take appropriate action or decision under Section 144 of the Cr.P.C. It is made clear that if no proceeding as indicated is set in, the said alluvial land shall vest in the state in terms of Section 17 of the TLR & LR Act. 10. With this observation and direction, this petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.