Arvind Tirkey vs State Of Jharkhand

Rajesh Shankar, J

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent nos.7 and 8 not to take possession of the petitioner’s land, appertaining to Thana no.82, Mouja Ramgarh, Khata no.270, plot no.3325, measuring an area of 0.57 acre; plot no.3326, measuring an area of 3.26 acres; and plot no.3327, measuring an area of 0.76 acre situated at Bengali Tola, Ward No.5, Ghanghar Pokhar, as, according to him, the said respondents are taking steps to dispossess the petitioner from the said land without following due procedure in accordance with law.

Mr. Vikash Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.7 refers to paragraph nos.7 & 8 of the counter affidavit dated 6th July, 2023 filed on behalf of the said respondents, which read as under:-

“7. That it is stated that in the instant Writ application the petitioner has alleged that the answering Respondent No. 7 and others want to take possession over the land of the petitioner pertaining to Ramgarh Mouja, Thana No. 52, Khata No. 270, Plot No. 3327, Area 0.76 Acres situated at Bangali Tola, Ward No-5, Dhandhar Pokhar is absolutely incorrect and hence the prayer of the petitioner is false and fabricated.

That it would be relevant to mention here that the residents of the above mentioned area through their joint representation vide Letter dated 01.06.2022 made a representation before the Chief Executive Officer, Cantonment Board, Ramgarh Cant and requested for cleaning of the Pond.”

It is, thus, submitted that the petitioner’s prayer made in the writ petition with respect to his dispossession from the land in question is not worth consideration.

Considering the aforesaid stand taken by the said respondents in the counter affidavit as well as the submission of learned counsel appearing on their behalf, no direction need be issued to the respondent nos.7 & 8.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

I.A. No.8492 of 2023 is also disposed of.

If the petitioner has any further grievance with respect to his dispossession from the land in question at the instance of some other authority, he may take appropriate recourse against the same as permissible under law.