Allowed

Smt Shobha Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Jan 2024LPA/376/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Letters Patent Appeal against dismissal of a writ petition challenging allowance of a pre-emption application by the revisional authority. The appellate court held the writ petition deserved indulgence given the statutory adjudication, set aside the writ court's order, and restored the writ petition with time to implead legal heirs of the deceased respondent.

What did the court decide?

Writ court's order dated 03.05.2023 set aside; W.P.(C) No. 5499 of 2015 restored with four weeks to implead legal heirs.

Smt Shobha Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Writ and Judicial Review | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

(Letters Patent Appellate Jurisdiction)

¶3

L.P.A. No. 376 of 2023

¶4

Smt. Shobha Devi, aged about 45 years, wife of Devnarayan Rabidas, resident of village Halmad, P.S. Silli, P.O. Silli, District Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶5

… Petitioner/Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand.

¶8

The Additional Member of Board of Revenue, Jharkhand, Ranchi, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶9

Additional Collector, Ranchi, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Kotwali, District Ranchi.

¶10

Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Ranchi, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Kotwali, District Ranchi.

¶11

Mahesh Kamar (now deceased) son of late Sahdeo Kamar, resident of village Halmad, P.O. and P.S. Silli, District Ranchi.

¶12

Basudeo Kamar (now deceased) son of late Sahadeo Kamar, of village Halmad, P.O. and P.S. Silli, District Ranchi.

¶13

..Respondents/Respondents

¶14

¶15

CORAM: HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶16

--------For the Appellant: Mr. Mahesh Kumar Mahto, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Gaurav Raj, A.C. to A.A.G.-II

¶17

¶18

3^rd January, 2024

¶19

Per, Shree Chandrashekhar, A.C.J.

¶20

This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the order dated 3^rd May 2023 by which W.P. (C) No. 5499 of 2015 has been dismissed due to non-compliance of the order dated 21^st February 2023 as a result of which the legal heirs/successors of the main contesting party who is the respondent no.5, could not be brought on record.

¶21

The writ Court held as under:

¶22

“4. However, due to non-compliance of peremptory order dated

¶23

21.02.2023, the present writ petition stands dismissed against the respondent no. 5. Since the respondent no. 5 is the main contesting party and necessary party and further the present writ petition has been dismissed against the respondent no. 5.

¶24

Consequently the entire writ petition stands dismissed.”

¶25

¶26

L.P.A. No. 376 of 2023

¶27

Briefly stated, the appellant purchased 40 decimals of agricultural land out of 1.34 acres through registered sale-deed no.5569/4921 dated 5^th April 2006 for a consideration of Rs.35,000/-. It is pleaded that the aforesaid land was purchased by Sahadeo Kamar who is the father of Basudeb Kamar and Mahesh Kamar from Lachhu Kamar through a registered sale-deed no.3776 dated 14^th June 1955.

¶28

From the records, it appears that the pre-emption application vide Case No.02 of 2006-07 was dismissed by the Land Reforms Deputy Collector on 3^rd January 2012. The appeal preferred in Land Ceiling Appeal Case No.14 R 15 of 2011-12 before the Additional Collector at Ranchi was also dismissed by an order dated 12^th September 2012. However, the revisional authority interfered in the matter and now the pre-emption application stands allowed by virtue of the order dated 27^th July 2015 passed in Board Case No.4 of 2013 against which the purchaser of the subject property approached this Court.

¶29

In view of the aforementioned adjudication by the statutory authorities, the writ petition deserved indulgence of the writ Court and therefore the writ Court’s order dated 3^rd May 2023 is set aside.

¶30

Consequently, W.P. (C) No. 5499 of 2015 is restored to its original records.

¶31

Four weeks’ time is granted to the writ petitioner for complying with the order dated 21^st February 2023 for issuing of notice in I.A No.2945 of 2020 to the proposed legal heirs/successors of the respondent no.5 on filing requisites etc. and to take other necessary steps for bringing the legal heirs/successors of the deceased parties on record.

¶32

L.P.A. No. 376 of 2023 is allowed, in the aforesaid terms.

¶33

(Shree Chandrashekhar, A.C.J.)

¶34

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶35

Manoj/-/2.

Smt Shobha Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Shobha Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sabir Hussain Vs the State of Jharkhand

The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary Vs Narmadeshwar Singh

The State of Jharkhand Vs Meena Devi

Jharkhand Krantikari Mazdoor Union Thr Its General Secretary D C Gosain Alias Dinesh Chandra Gohain Vs Bokaro Power Supply Company Pvt. Ltd. through Its Chief Executive Officer

East Central Railway through Chief Administrative Officer (Construction) Vs M/S Pratibha Royal (Jv) Represented through Its Authorized Signatory Namely Dhanajay

Nirmala Devi Vs M/S Bharat Coking Coal Limited through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director