C.N.T. Surakcha Samittee vs The State of Jharkhand

Mr. D.N. Patel, J. (Oral) - This Public Interest Litigation has been preferred by the petitioner with the following prayers:

"a. For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions commanding upon the respondents to implement the report prepared by the five members committee upon the petitioner''s representation and found the S.A.R. Officer and others, are involved in criminal conspiracy to cheat the tribal masses and got it transferred to people contrary to the provisions of the C.N.T. Act and in such an illegal acts the officer, have amassed crores of rupees.

b. For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions commanding upon the respondents to register First Information Report in the light of the order of the commissioner vide letter No. 1115 dated 27.06.2013, wherein he has established on the basis of report and the C.D. of the open space having no construction, has been shown to have "substantial structure" over the land.

c. For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions commanding upon the respondents to investigate the criminal conducts of the S.A.R. Officers namely Anup Kishore Saran and Matias Vijay Toppo, who has connived with the Advocates and has fixed compensation of the land of tribals (thus changed the title) on the basis of fake electricity bill, fake residential certificates, caste certificates etc., has been manufactured just to do the criminal act, but, no action has been taken till date by the respective Deputy Commissioner''s."

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that several grievances have been ventilated against the Revenue Officers, who are also deciding the revenue matters, under the Scheduled Area Regulation,1969.

It has been vehemently submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the reports of high ranking Revenue Officers are also on the record to the effect that there are few irregularities/illegalities, committed by the revenue officers, while deciding the SAR (Scheduled Area Regulation Officer) cases under the aforesaid Regulations and, hence, it is prayed by this petitioner that some strict actions may be initiated against those revenue officers.

Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that under any law or statute or act, whenever any power is given to the judicial officers or quasi judicial officers to decide the rights and liabilities of the parties, there are bound to be grievances about the illegality of those orders. Few people will remain happy with the orders and few are always dissatisfied souls.

The aforesaid facts are rampant whenever any revenue matters are involved. There are powers of review, which can be utilized upon applications, preferred by such dissatisfied souls or by suo-motu. Thus, whenever there is power of review given to the officers, it can be utilized whenever there is any patent or ostensible irregularities or illegalities. Such phenomenon regarding usage of the review powers, more particularly under the revenue laws, are not so unknown to the public at large and that does not mean that whenever any review power is exercised and review applications are allowed, the subordinate revenue officers should be dismissed or always departmental actions should be initiated. Several illustrations have been given by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner about the orders passed by the officers, who are exercising their powers under Scheduled Area Regulation, 1969, in the State of Jharkhand. Review powers could have been exercised by the high ranking administrative officers, who are empowered under the existing revenue laws.

Looking to the counter-affidavits filed in this Public Interest Litigation, it appears that the State itself is vigilant about the aforesaid facts. Adequate steps have been initiated, in accordance with law, by the State and, therefore, we are not inclined to give further guidance for more adequate steps. Otherwise, there will be no end of said adequacy. The concerned erring officers have been put under suspension, Preliminary inquiries have been conducted and regular charge-sheets have been filed against them for the alleged misconduct and after giving adequate opportunities of being heard to them, departmental proceedings have also been initiated against those erring officers.

Moreover, the State can also take in review such orders, in accordance with law, if the high ranking administrative officers under the revenue laws think it just, proper and equitable that any offence has been committed, proper action can be taken under the Criminal Laws also.

With the aforesaid observations, this Public Interest Litigation is hereby disposed of.

I.A. No. 6295 of 2014:

In view of final disposal of main writ petition, this interlocutory application also stand disposed of.