Nab Kumar Jana vs State of Jharkhand

This case is taken up through video conferencing.

At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, is ignored.

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur- respondent no.2 to consider the petitioner's prayer for stay in S.A.R. Appeal No.50 of 2020, which is pending before the said respondent, and further to stay implementation of the order dated 15th July, 2020 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) passed by the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Ghatshila- respondent no.3 in Land Restoration Case no.03 of 2017-18.

Mr. A. K. Sahani, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the respondent no.5- Lachhu Oraon filed Land Restoration Case no.03 of 2017-18 against the petitioner under Section 71-A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 in the court of respondent no.3. The said land restoration case was disposed of vide order dated 15 th July, 2020, directing the petitioner to restore the land in question in favour of the respondent no.5. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the respondent no.2 on 16th September, 2020 under Section 215 of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908, which was registered as S.A.R. Appeal no.50 of 2020. The petitioner also made prayer for staying the implementation of the order dated 15th July, 2020 passed by the respondent no.3 in Land Restoration Case no.03 of 2017-18. He also filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay occurred in preferring the said appeal. The grievance of the petitioner is that since the respondent no.2 is not regularly holding the court, the appeal preferred by the petitioner containing the prayer for interim relief has not yet been taken up/considered by the said appellate authority. In the meantime, the Circle Officer, Musabani- respondent no.4 vide letter no.102 dated 2nd February, 2021 has requested the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Ghatshila to deploy police force so as to restore possession of the land in question in favour of the respondent no.5. Under the aforesaid compelling circumstance, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

Mr. P. C. Roy, learned S.C. (L&C)-I, appearing on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 4 submits that the respondent no.4 is duty bound to take steps for restoration of the land in favour of the respondent no.5 in terms with the order dated 15th July, 2020 passed by the respondent no.3 in Land Restoration Case no.03 of 2017-18.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view that SAR Appeal no.50 of 2020 preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 15th July, 2020 passed by the respondent no.3, also making prayer for interim relief, is pending consideration before the respondent no.2, without entering into the merit of the case, the respondent no.2 is directed to take up the said appeal preferred by the petitioner within a period of one week from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The said respondent after providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or his representative as well as the respondent no.5 (on ensuring his presence) shall consider the limitation petition liberally. The petitioner's prayer for interim relief against the order dated 15th July, 2020 passed by the respondent no.3 in Land Restoration Case no.03 of 2017-18 shall be considered by the respondent no.2 according to its merit. Till such order is passed by the respondent no.2, no coercive step shall be taken against the petitioner in pursuance of letter no.102 dated 2nd February, 2021 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent no.4 to the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Ghatshila.

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