Jharkhand High Court
Ashish Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 16 June, 2022
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No.2285 of 2013
---------
Ashish Kumar Singh ......... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. ......... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
---------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sameer Saurabh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sreenu Garapati, S.C.-III
---
16/16.06.2022 Reference may be made to the order dated 12.05.2022
2. Mr. Sreenu Garapati, learned S.C.-III appearing for the State of Jharkhand has submitted that one interlocutory application being I.A. No.5033 of 2022 has been filed praying therein for grant of four weeks' time to file affidavit in compliance of the order dated 12.05.2022.
3. It appears that the instant writ petition is of the year, 2013, whereby and whereunder, the following prayers have been made:-
"(A) For quashing of order dated 25/07/98 passed by the concerned respondent by which Zamabandi created in their favour has been cancelled arbitrarily.
(B) For asking show cause from the respondent that the under what authority and circumstances they have initiated the proceeding after such delay disbelieving/discarding order passed by the then authorities.
(C) For further asking show cause to the respondents that they have got jurisdiction to proceed in the matter after such a long period and without issuing notice to the concerned parties whereas their name have already entered in register II of the said circle Zamabandi has been opened and running in their name.
(D) For asking show cause from the concerned respondent that under what authority of law they adopted dual policy in the instant matter having same and similar circumstance rather identical matter they are allowing to run Zamabandi and accept 2 rent receipt till 2009 in the name of Shatru Mardan Prasad Singh and in the matter of these petitioners they are showing their declines.
(E) For asking show cause from the respondents that why required opportunity of hearing was not given to these petitioners in the said proceeding which is violative of principal of natural justice or not.
(F) For issuance of direction to the respondents to act in the instant matter as the provision made under Tenants Holding (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973, as per which the respondents only have to ascertain their possession. (G) For further asking show cause from the respondent that the conduct of the respondent is not otherwise bad because in respect of landed property of same khata previously matter has been decided up to division bench of this Hon'ble Court wherein ratio has been decided and the same become precedent and binding upon them or not.
(H) For issuance of show cause from the respondent that they have not failed to appreciate that for cancellation of settlement and cancellation of Zamabandi is two different matter and two separate proceeding requires and in absence of the same the said order under challenge is not tenable in the eye of law? (I) For asking show cause from the respondent that they have not failed to appreciate that for cancellation of Zamabandi running in favour of the petitioners after 50 years by them is tenable in the eye of law for that it is settled law that the power was vested only to the competent civil Court as law settled in this context.
(J) For issuance of direction to the respondents not to disturb the peaceful position of the petitioners over the land in question of the petitioner as contended in this writ application."
4. The writ petition is running under the heading 'For Orders' (with defects), since, the certified copy of the order dated 21.05.1998 has not been filed.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed interlocutory application being I.A. No.7698 of 2013 for extension of time to file aforesaid certified copy to bring it on record. Subsequently, it has 3 been pointed out that certified copy of the order dated 21.05.1998 could not have been filed, since, even in spite of filing of requisition, the same is not being supplied by the concerned Court.
6. This Court, after taking into consideration the aforesaid submission, has passed the order on 21.02.2022 showing its dis- pleasure on the ground that even though, the requisitions have been made for obtaining the certified copy but the same has not been supplied.
This Court, in such background, was constrained to call upon the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi. He submitted before this Court that he will take care by taking appropriate action against the concerned employees/authorities or to recommend to take action before the higher authority, for ready reference, order dated 21.02.2022 is being reproduced hereinbelow:-
"The matter has been taken up through video conferencing. It is very unfortunate that still, in spite of requisition made on behalf of the petitioner for getting the certified copy of the order which is under challenge in this writ petition, it appears from the record that the requisitions have been made before the concerned authorities i.e., the Circle Officer or the Sub Divisional Officer or even in the office of the Deputy Commissioner but as yet the certified copy has not been obtained.
This Court, after considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, has directed Mr. Sreenu Garapati, learned S.C-III, appearing for the State of Jharkhand to ask the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi to participate in the Court proceeding through on-line mode.
In pursuance to the aforesaid direction, the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi has appeared. He on being apprised by the learned State counsel assured this Court that he will take care by taking appropriate action against the concerned employees/authorities or to recommend to take action before the higher authority, who are found to be involved in not discharging their duties in supplying the certified copy in favour of the litigant, thereby coming in the way of justice dispensation system.
The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, has assured this Court to put his office in order as also conduct an enquiry in this regard to fix accountability for taking appropriate action, in accordance with law.
He also assured that in the meanwhile the certified copy, of the impugned order, shall be supplied to the writ petitioner.
In view thereof, let this matter be posted on 03.03.2022."
7. The matter was again listed on 24.03.2022, but on that date, affidavit was filed bringing to the notice of this Court that the concerned record has been misplaced from the Collectorate, 4 Ranchi. This Court, therefore, passed an order that in the circumstance of non-traceability of the concerned file, accountability is required to be fixed upon the erring officials/employees, which can be done by initiating departmental proceeding against the concerned officials/employees or by instituting a criminal case, so that, such occurrence may not be repeated in future, for ready reference, the order dated 24.03.2022 is being reproduced hereinbelow:-
"... ... ...
... ... ..
It has been informed to this Court that one affidavit in pursuance of the aforesaid order has been filed. However, the copy of the same is not on record but the learned State counsel has produced the copy of the said affidavit for its perusal It is very astonishing that the concerned record is misplaced from the Collectorate, Ranchi, due to which, this writ petition which is of the year 2013, is lying pending.
However, one affidavit has been filed wherein it has been stated that steps are being taken to trace out the record.
This Court, in such circumstances, is of the considered view that in this case, accountability is required to be fixed upon the erring officials/employees which can be done by initiating a departmental proceeding against the concerned official/employee or by instituting a criminal case so that such occurrence may not be repeated in future.
But, on the request made by Mr. Sachin Kumar, learned AAGII, the matter is being adjourned for a week by giving a chance to trace out the record, failing which, on the next date of hearing, required order will be passed.
Accordingly, let this case be listed on 31.03.2022"
8. The matter was again listed on 07.04.2022 and by way of an affidavit, it has been brought to the notice of this Court that an FIR has been instituted.
This Court, vide aforesaid order has shown its concern that even though, an FIR has been instituted, but how the writ petition will be disposed of and for seeking suggestion to that effect, the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms as also the Chief Secretary of the State were directed to appear.
9. The Chief Secretary of the State of Jharkhand appeared on the next date of hearing, i.e., 21.04.2022, and submitted before this Court that he is facing difficulty as on today to suggest as to how 5 the writ petition will be disposed of in absence of the impugned order.
He, therefore, sought for some time to have a consultation with the Additional Chief Secretary of the Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms of the State of Jharkhand and come back with the suggestion.
10. The personal appearance of the Additional Chief Secretary was dispensed with a direction for his appearance on the next date of hearing i.e., on 12.05.2022.
11. The Additional Chief Secretary, appeared on 12.05.2022 and on that date, the learned Advocate General appeared on behalf of the State of Jharkhand and submitted that despite institution of the FIR, the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi has constituted a separate committee for the purpose of surfacing the complicity of the officer/staff posted in the Collectorate for tracing of the record as also steps have been taken for restructuring of file, therefore, prayer for adjournment was made.
12. This Court, on consideration of the aforesaid submission, adjourned the matter. However, the S.S.P. Ranchi was directed to be impleaded as party-respondent to the proceeding, for ready reference, the order dated 12.05.2022 is being reproduced hereinbelow:-
"Reference may be made to the order dated 21.04.2022. In pursuance thereof, Mr. L. Khiyangte, Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration & Land Reforms, Govt. of Jharkhand is present before this Court.
Learned Advocate General appearing for the State of Jharkhand has submitted that despite institution of the FIR, the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi has constituted a separate committee for the purpose of surfacing the complicity of the officers/staff posted in the Collectorate for tracing of the record as also steps are being taken for restructuring, therefore, prayer for adjournment has been sought for in this writ petition for bringing to the notice of this Court about further development of the tracing of the record as also the outcome of the Committee which has been constituted by the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi.
This Court has put a pin pointed question about such investigation, upon which, learned Advocate General has submitted that in absence of any instruction, he is not in a position to say about the said investigation.6
This Court, after considering the aforesaid submission, is of the view that the S.S.P., Ranchi may be impleaded as party- respondent to the proceeding Accordingly, Office is directed to implead S.S.P., Ranchi as party respondent to the proceeding.
Mr. Sreenu Garpati, learned SC-III waives notice on behalf of the S.S.P., Ranchi and has sought for time to file affidavit showing the progress in the matter.
As prayed for, let this matter be listed on 16.06.2022. Personal appearance of Mr. L. Khiyangte, Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration & Land Reforms, Govt. of Jharkhand is dispensed with for the present."
13. One interlocutory application being I.A. No.5033 of 2022 has been filed by one Raju Kumar Singh, presently posted as the Land Reform Deputy Collector seeking four weeks adjournment in the matter on the ground that the Committee constituted is looking after the matter.
14. In view of above, it is evident that the document is not available and the same has been admitted by the Deputy Commissioner as also the Chief Secretary and the Additional Chief Secretary of the State of Jharkhand for which a Committee has been constituted as also the FIR has been instituted. It has been informed by the learned State Counsel, on instruction, that the investigation is at the preliminary stage.
15. This Court has posed a pin-pointed question that what is the meaning of 'preliminary investigation', as to whether, the definition of 'preliminary investigation' is referred in the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The learned State Counsel has failed to answer the same.
16. In that view of the matter and taking into consideration the fact that the document has become traceless from the Collectorate, Ranchi and even in spite of instituting an FIR, since there is no progress as has been submitted that the investigation is at the preliminary stage. Further, even the fact about non-availability of the file, it is well known to the highest Bureaucrats of the State, i.e., the Chief Secretary of the State of Jharkhand and the Additional Secretary of the concerned Department i.e., the Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms, even that, it appears prima-facie to this Court that the State Machinery is very negligent in 7 coming to the conclusion, as to how the file has become traceless and how this writ petition will be disposed of, since, on the last occasion, the Chief Secretary of the State has submitted that sincere efforts are being taken for restructuring the file.
17. Considering the reason, the prayer for adjournment for four weeks, as per the reason assigned in the interlocutory application, is hereby rejected.
18. I.A. No.5033 of 2022 stands disposed of.
19. This Court, in that view of the matter is about to pose a question to the State Government, as to why, the matter may not be handed over to the C.B.I. in order to see the complicity of one or the other officials of the District Administration taking into consideration the fact that the vital document pertaining to nature of land/title thereof is missing and even though, the FIR said to have been instituted on 06.04.2022 as has been sworn in the affidavit dated 14.06.2022 filed on behalf of the State but even after lapse of considerable period, it is being informed by the State Counsel that the investigation is at the preliminary stage.
20. This Court, in the backdrop of the aforesaid fact prima-facie, is of the view that the State Machinery is conducting investigation with lackadaisical approach without caring about the fact that non- availability of file is coming in the way of dispensation of Justice.
21. The Additional Chief Secretary of the Department has submitted before this Court for restructuring of the record, but no such information has been furnished to that effect and as such, the concerned Department is directed to file an affidavit and explain as to why even after lapse of considerable period, the record has not been restructured.
22. This Court usually refrains from calling upon the officials of the State Government but taking into consideration the fact that due to negligent approach of the State authority, the writ petition of the year, 2013 is not being disposed of due to non-availability of file, which said to have been misplaced and even the investigation in the criminal case is at very slow pace and as such, it prima-facie appears 8 to this Court that the investigation is required to be handed over to the C.B.I. and as such for taking such view, this Court, deems it fit and proper to direct the Director General of Police, Jharkhand as also the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi to explain about slow pace of investigation, even in a case, when the higher authorities of the State, i.e., the Chief Secretary and the Additional Chief Secretary are well aware about missing of the concerned file as also due to non-availability of the certified copy, the issue as has been agitated in the writ petition is not being disposed of and thereby, the action of the State is coming in the way of dispensation of justice.
23. Post this matter on 07.07.2022. On that day, the Director General of Police, Jharkhand as also the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi shall appear in person.
24. Since this order has been passed in presence of Mr. Garapati, the learned State Counsel, as such, he is directed to communicate it to the concerned officials forthwith for compliance of the order.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) Rohit/-