Quashed

Narayan Ram v. the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Jharkhand HC19 Aug 2019WPC/3354/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petritioner challenged an order remanding a land dispute after other claimants were heard but the petitioner was not. The court quashed the impugned order citing violation of natural justice and remanded the matter to the original authority for a rehearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 02.12.2011 quashed; matter remanded to Commissioner for fresh order after hearing parties.

Narayan Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors. — Property and Title | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 3354 of 2012

¶3

Narayan Ram .... Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

The Commissioner, Santhal Paragna Division, Dumka

¶7

The Deputy Commissioner, Dumka

¶8

The Settlement Officer, Dumka

¶9

The Assistant Settlement Officer, Dumka

¶10

The Circle Officer, Dumka

¶11

Jagdish Marik

¶12

Govind Panjiyara … Respondents

¶13

¶14

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

¶15

--For the Petitioner : Mr. D. C. Mishra, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, A.C. to S.C. (L&C) I For the Respondent No. 7 : Mr. Nagmani Tiwari, Advocate ---

¶16

Order No. 14 Dated 19^th August, 2019

¶17

Heard Mr. D. C. Mishra learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned A.C. to S.C. (L&C) I for the State and Mr. Nagmani Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 7.

¶18

The petitioner in this writ application has prayed for quashing of the order dated 02.12.2011 passed by the Commissioner, Santhal Paragna Division, Dumka in R.M.A. Case No. 04/2009-10 by which the appeal was remanded to the Settlement Officer-cum- Incharge Officer, Dumka. The petitioner has further prayed for a direction to the respondent State to drop the proceeding of Fauti Case No. 02/1982 since the land in question is not a waste or abandoned land rather the same belongs to the petitioner and the legal heirs of recorded tenant of Bhutia Kharin.

¶19

It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the matter was remanded to the Settlement Officer by the Commissioner on 02.12.2011 without hearing the petitioner and on such score the order is bad in law which has been opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent No. 7.

¶20

The factual aspect of the case reveals that the State had initiated a Fauti Case in respect of the disputed land in which Jagdish Marik and others and Bashant Panjiyara and others had contested the case. Subsequently Jagdish Marik and others and Bashant Panjiyara and others had filed R.M.A. Case No. 228/1985-86 before the Commissioner, Santhal Paragna Division, Dumka. The Commissioner, Santhal Paragna Division, Dumka had remanded

¶21

¶22

R.M.A. Case No. 228/1985-86 to the Settlement Officer, Dumka for fresh adjudication and to consider the claim of the parties under the provisions of Section 27, 28 and 29 of the S.P.T. Act. After remand R.M.R. Case No. 13/2008 was started before the Settlement Officer in which the petitioner had intervened in which the final order was passed on 09.01.2009 and the entries made in last Survey Khatiyan has been cancelled and it was ordered to make entry of the name of the petitioners Narayan Ram, Bashudeo Ram and Mohan Ram son of late Etwari. Against the said order Jagdish Marik and 20 others preferred appeal being R.M.A. No. 04/2009-10 in which vide order dated 02.12.2011 the matter was remanded back to the Settlement Officer for further consideration after hearing the respective parties.

¶23

The claim of the petitioner that the petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing by the Commissioner appears to be well founded since the same has not been disputed by the respondent concerned. The order of the Commissioner reflects that the other claimants were not heard and the same was a primary ground to remand the matter back to the Settlement Officer. However, the Commissioner also seems to have made an error inasmuch as the order dated 02.12.2011 was passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and since the same is in violation of the principles of natural justice, the impugned order dated 02.12.2011 passed by the Commissioner, Santhal Paragna Division, Dumka in R.M.A. Case No. 04/2009-10 is hereby quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Commissioner, Santhal Paragna Division, Dumka to pass an order after hearing the respective parties.

¶24

This writ application stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction.

¶25

(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)

¶26

Narayan Ram v. the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narayan Ram v. the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ms Mineral and Minerals Ltd. through Its Agent of Mines Sri Bijesh Kumar Jha Vs State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Prem Ram Alias Mukesh Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Arjun Kumar Vs Jharkhand State Housing Board

Sheo Narayan Singh Vs Excise Department

P S Natarajan Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

Akshay Kumar Singh Vs Industries or Finance Department