Disposed

Suresh Mahto v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Jharkhand HC22 Apr 2024WPC/2556/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of a revenue revision order restoring land to respondent No.5 under Section 71A CNT Act proceedings. Civil court had since declared title in favour of the petitioner's uncle by Title Appeal judgment dated 28.02.2019, with execution pending. Court disposed of the writ petition with liberty to seek remedy before the appropriate forum.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to seek remedy against the impugned order dated 17.01.2012 before the appropriate forum.

Suresh Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors. — Land Acquisition | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (C) No. 2556 of 2012

¶2

Suresh Mahto .... .. ... Petitioner(s)

¶3

Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand. 2.Circle Officer, Angara, Ranchi. 3.Additional District Magistrate, Ranchi. 4.Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi. 5.Shakuntala Mundain @ Dukhi Mossomat

¶4

.. ... ...Respondent(s)

¶5

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

......... For the Petitioner(s) : Ms. Bakshi Vibha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vineet Prakash, AC to SC-IV For the Resp.5 : Mr. Manoj Kumar Choubey, Advocate

¶7

17/22.04.2024. Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

¶8

An order of restoration was passed in favour of Shakuntala Mundain (Respondent No.5) in a proceeding under Section 71A of the C. N. T. Act in Misc. Case No.287 of 1970 vide order dated 26.07.1974 and against the said order, Revenue Appeal No.349 of 1975-76 was filed which was dismissed vide order dated 08.05.1978 and Revenue Revision No.169 of 1978 was also rejected vide order dated 18.02.1980. Thereafter the petitioner filed Writ Petition being W.P.(C) No.4995 of 2002 and the same remitted back to the authority so as to decide the matter on merits.

¶9

Thereafter, the instant Writ Petition has been filed for direction upon the respondents particularly, respondent Nos.2 to 4 to quash the order dated 17.01.2012 as contained in Ranchi Revenue Revision No.169 of 1978 whereby and where under the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi, dismissed the petitioner’s petition dated 18.12.2008 and to rescind, revoke, modify and/ or cancel the nominal “Dakhal- Dehani” executed by the Circle officer, Angara, Ranchi in Case No.324 of 1970 dated 24.01.2001 from evicting the petitioner from his raiyati land appertaining to Khata No.100/178, Plot No.345 and 338 (area 0.50 acre and 0.13 acre respectively) total area being 0.63 acre, situated in Village-Soso, P.S. Angara, Ranchi.

¶10

For a further prayer that respondent nos.2 to 4 may be directed to restore the said land to the petitioner forthwith and recognize the continuing jamabandi of the petitioner and to continue to issue rent receipts by acceptance of rent of the land, in question which was illegally stopped with effect from 1999-

¶11

¶12

2000 and further for evicting of the private respondent no.5 whose husband, Late Dharam Singh Munda has been illegally given possession.

¶13

The petitioner claims to be settled on the land, in question appertaining to an area of 0.63 acre, situated in Village Soso, P.S. Angara, Ranchi settled by a Registered Dowami Patta in the name of petitioner’s grand-father, Fekan Kumhar by the Ex-landlord of the Village Dukhi Munda on 31.01.1950.

¶14

It is case of the petitioner that after the said settlement, the petitioner was in peaceful possession of the land, in question.

¶15

Being aggrieved by the order or restoration, the petitioner preferred Writ Petition being W.P.(C) No.4995 of 2002 wherein the matter was remanded to the revisional court for hearing the petitioner and to pass an order within a period of six months and in compliance to the order, the revisional court after hearing the parties passed order on 17.01.2012 and against which, the instant Writ Petition has been filed before this Court.

¶16

During the course of argument it is submitted that petitioner’s uncle had also preferred one Title Declaratory Suit No.189 of 2000 filed by Shashi Bhushan Mahto, S/o Bhado Ram Mahto & Ors. against Most. Shakuntala Devi and the same was dismissed vide judgment dated 08.04.2009. The Appeal against the said judgment being Title Appeal No.60 of 2009 has been allowed. Title of the plaintiff(s) for the land appertaining to Khata No.100, R.S. Plot Nos.338 and 345, total area 0.63 acres has been declared in favour of the plaintiff(s) vide judgment dated 28.02.2019. Execution Case No.162 of 2019 for execution of the decree.

¶17

Learned AC to SC-IV for the State as well as learned counsel for the Respondent no.5 has not disputed the fact that the appeal has been disposed of in favour of the petitioner’s uncle, Shashi Bhusan, Bansidhar Mahto and Bhuneshwar Mahto with respect to the land, in question.

¶18

Learned counsel for the Respondent No.5 has submitted that appropriate steps have been taken on their behalf for preferring Second Appeal.

¶19

10.Having considered the submissions of both the sides, it appears that the title has already been declared by the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction and further the execution case is pending for execution of the decree with respect to the land, in question. In any case declaration of title by a judgment and decree passed in a title suit shall prevail over the order passed by the revenue court(s).

¶20

¶21

Since the issue of title has been adjudicated upon with respect to the land, in question, as submitted on behalf of the Petitioner, therefore, the instant writ petition is disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner to seek remedy against the impugned order before appropriate forum.

¶22

( Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J. )

¶23

Sandeep/Uploaded.

¶24

Suresh Mahto v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Mahto v. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep Ganjhu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chamar Singh Pahan Alias Chamber Pahan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Geetanjali Soren Vs Ashish Soren

Abhay Kumar Shroff And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Mankhu Gope Alias Makhan Gope Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Sitaram Mahto and Ors. Vs Khirod Mahato and Ors.