Ram Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand through Deputy Commissioner, Gumla - Cum - Appellate Authority — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ram Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand through Deputy Commissioner, Gumla - Cum - Appellate Authority — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a revision before the revisional authority within three weeks along with applications for condonation of delay and interim relief, to be considered by the revisional authority in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition is maintainable when the petitioner has not availed the revision remedy under Section 37 of the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 2011 against the impugned orders. +1 more

Court's answer

Since the petitioner preferred the writ petition without taking recourse to the revision remedy under Section 37 of the Act, 2011 against the impugned orders, the Court was not inclined to entertain the writ petition at this stage.

Ratio / Principle

Liberty granted to the petitioner to prefer a revision against the impugned orders before the revisional authority; if such revision is filed within three weeks along with an application for condonation of delay and one praying for interim relief, the revisional authority shall consider the same in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (W.P.(C) No.248 of 2025, High Court of Jharkhand, Rajesh Shankar, J., order dated 06.03.2025) challenging eviction orders passed under the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 2011 — the SDO, Gumla's order dated 04.10.2016 in Eviction Suit No.153 of 2016 under Sections 19 and 25, the appellate dismissal dated 22.03.2022 in Eviction Appeal No.35 of 2016-17, compliance letter no.1201 dated 05.12.2024, and eviction notice Memo No.918 dated 03.01.2025 — was disposed of at the threshold: the Court declined to entertain it because the petitioner had not first availed the revision remedy under Section 37 of the Act, 2011. Liberty was granted to file a revision within three weeks with applications for condonation of delay and interim relief, to be considered by the revisional authority in accordance with law. The merits of the eviction orders were not decided.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.248 of 2025

Ram Oraon, aged about 65 years, son of Late Mangra Oraon, resident of Village-Dunduria, P.O. & P.S.-Gumla, DistrictGumla. .......... Petitioner.

-Versus-

The State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner, Gumla-cum-Appellate Authority, P.O. & P.S.-Gumla, DistrictGumla.

The Additional Collector, Gumla.

The Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Rent Controller, Gumla.

The Circle Officer, Gumla.

Smt. Srimanti Devi, wife of Late Aganu Oraon, resident of Village-Gumla, P.O. & P.S.-Gumla, District-Gumla at present residing at village Lalgutuwa, Sarnatoli (Chalatoli), P.O. Lalgutuwa, P.S.-Nagri, District-Ranchi. .......... Respondents.

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manav Poddar, A.C. to A.A.G.-I -----

Order No.07 Date: 06.03.2025

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 4^th October, 2016 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Gumla (the respondent no.3) in Eviction Suit No.153 of 2016, whereby the said respondent while exercising the power under Sections 19 and 25 of the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 2011 (in short “the Act, 2011” ) directed the petitioner to vacate the house in question within 15 days and further directed the Circle Officer/Officer-in-Charge, Gumla to get the house in question vacated and to hand over the possession of the same to the respondent no.5 within 15 days of the said order. Further prayer has been made for quashing the order dated 22^nd March, 2022 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Gumla-cum-Appellate Authority (the

respondent no.1) in Eviction Appeal No.35 of 2016-17, whereby the said respondent dismissed the appeal affirming the order dated 4^th October, 2016 passed by the respondent no.3. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing letter no.1201 dated 5^th December, 2024 issued by the Additional Collector, Gumla (the respondent no.2), whereby the Circle Officer, Gumla (the respondent no.4) has been directed to comply the order dated 22^nd March, 2022 passed by the respondent no.1 in Eviction Appeal No.35 of 2016-17. Further prayer has been made for quashing the notice as contained in Memo No.918 dated 3^rd January, 2025, whereby the respondent no.4 has directed the petitioner to produce an order of the competent authority staying the implementation of the order dated 4^th October, 2016 till 9^th January, 2025, failing which the District Administration would take steps for his eviction from the house in question.

Mr. Manav Poddar, learned A.C. to A.A.G.-I appearing on behalf of the respondent-State raises a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the present writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has not preferred any revision under Section 37 of the Act, 2011 against the impugned orders dated 4^th October, 2016 and 22^nd March, 2022 passed by the respondent no.3 and the respondent no.1 respectively.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering that the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition without taking recourse of Section 37 of the Act, 2011

by preferring revision against the aforesaid impugned orders,

I am not inclined to entertain the same at this stage.

The petitioner is, however, given liberty to prefer a revision against the aforesaid orders before the revisional authority. If such revision is filed within three weeks along with an application seeking condonation of delay as well as praying for interim relief, the same shall be considered by the revisional authority in accordance with law.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction.

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

Rohit /