WPC/6488/2018 of BALA MAHTO Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 21 December 2018

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Deputy Commissioner, Palamau at Daltonganj

3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Medininagar, District- Palamau

4. Circle Officer, Pandu, PO & PS- Pandu, District- Palamau

…. Respondents

CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

For the Petitioner :- Mr. A.K.Sahani, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Satish Kumar, A.C. to G.A.

-Order No.02

Dated: 21.12.2018

At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects as pointed out by the office are ignored.

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents particularly respondent no. 2 to consider and dispose of the encroachment appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order passed by the respondent no. 4 as contained in letter no. 806 dated 04.10.2018 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) whereby the petitioner has been directed to remove the alleged encroachment from the land in question.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner purchased a piece of land measuring an area of 59.50 decimals pertaining to plot no. 107 and measuring an area of 41 decimals pertaining to plot no. 110 under Khata no. 286, Mouza- Pandu from the rightful owner through registered sale deed and he came in peaceful possession of the said land. It is further submitted that a piece of land appertaining to plot no. 134, khata no. 310, Mouza- Pandu was recorded as ‘Gair Mazurwa’ land in the name of the ex-landlord. In the year 1935, the ex-landlord settled the part of the said land measuring an area of 21 decimal out of plot no. 134, khata no. 310 in favour of Deo Chand Mahto - the father of the petitioner on grant of rent receipt. After vesting, a demand was opened in favour of the petitioner upon death of his father with respect to the said land. Thereafter, the petitioner has been paying rent to the state government for the said piece of land.

Irrespective of the said fact, on complaint made by some local residents before the ‘Mukhyamantri Jan Samwad’, the respondent no. 4 vide letter dated 04.10.2018 (annexure-7 to the writ petition) in a mechanical manner, directed the petitioner to remove the alleged encroachment from the aforesaid land treating the same to be public land. In pursuance of the said letter, the petitioner submitted his reply on 09.10.2018 before the respondent no.4, however when no action was taken, he preferred an appeal before the respondent no. 2 on 12.10.2018 with prayer to stay the operation of the letter dated 04.10.2018 issued by the respondent no.4 (a copy of memo of appeal has been annexed as Annexure-9 to the writ petition). It is further submitted that the petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court as the respondent no. 2 has not been regularly holding the court and the said appeal is still pending before the said authority. In the meantime, the respondent no. 4 has issued letter no. 953 dated 13.12.2018 directing the petitioner to remove the alleged encroachment from the said land failing which appropriate action would be taken against him.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has averred in the writ petition that aggrieved by the letter dated 04.10.2018 issued by the respondent no. 4, he has preferred an appeal on 12.10.2018 before the respondent no. 2. As per the averment of the petitioner, the said appeal has not yet been taken up by the respondent no. 2. In the meantime, the respondent no. 4 has issued letter no. 953 dated 13.12.2018 directing the petitioner to remove the alleged encroachment from the said land. As such, I direct the respondent no. 2 to take up the appeal and consider the prayer of the petitioner for stay of the operation of the letters dated 04.10.2018 and 13.12.2018 issued by the respondent no. 4 on an early date after providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other concerned parties.

Conclusion

Till the respondent no. 2 passes an order on the stay matter, the construction existing over the land in question shall not be removed.

The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction.

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)