WRIT PETITION 32 of 1993 on 3 July 2007

1. Binu Prasad Munda @ Beni Prasad Munda, son of Late Daud Munda

2. Jilen Munda @ Jolen Herenj, son of Late Benjamin MundaBoth resident of village Timra, Karra, Khunti

... ... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand, through Chief Secretary, Project Building, Ranchi

2. Deputy Commissioner, Distt Khunti

3. Sub Divisional Officer, Distt Khunti

4. LRDC, Distt Khunti

5. Circle Officer, Distt Khunti

6. Markus Munda, son of Late Masidas Munda,Vill Timra, PO and PS Karra, Distt Ranchi

7. Ranjan Munda, son of Late Anand Munda, Vill Timra, PO and PS Karra, Distt Ranchi… ... Respondents

-----------------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

For the Petitioners : Mr. Gaurav, Advocate Mr. Sarju Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent-State: Mr. V. K. Prasad, S.C. (L&C)

--------------

02/24.08.2015 Aggrieved by order dated 03.07.2007 in SAR Misc.

No. 01 of 2006-07 and order dated 24.01.2013 in SAR Misc. Appeal No. 50-R-15/2008-09, the present writ petition has been filed.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that SAR Misc. No. 01 of 2006-07 was instituted for a direction to the Circle Officer to hand over possession of the suit property to the petitioners however, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Khunti dismissed the suit holding that the SAR court has no jurisdiction and the appeal preferred by the petitioners challenging order dated 03.07.2007 has also been erroneously dismissed.

3. Order passed in SAR Case No. 32 of 1993-94 was challenged in SAR Appeal No. 14R-15/1997-98. The appellate Tanuj/- court remanded the matter to the Special Officer for a fresh consideration. After remand SAR Case No. 32 of 1993-94 was dismissed vide order dated 24.05.2002. The grievance of the petitioners is that during the pendency of appeal the respondent nos. 6 and 7 forcibly took possession of the suit property.

4. It appears that SAR Case No. 32 of 1993-94 was instituted for restoration of land and vide order dated 24.05.2002 the SAR court closed the proceeding holding that the dispute as to title can be adjudicated in the civil court. Considering order dated 24.05.2002, SAR Misc. No. 01 of 2006-07 was dismissed.

5. In view of order dated 24.05.2002 passed in SAR Case No. 32 of 1993-94, I am of the opinion that, the SAR court has no power to order delivery of possession to the petitioners. The petitioners are required to approach civil court. I find no error in the impugned order dated 24.01.2013 and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)