Ramchandra Burman vs The State Of Jharkhand on 14 October, 2019

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Ramchandra Burman vs The State Of Jharkhand on 14 October, 2019

Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad

                                    1

IN   THE       HIGH
                  COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                 W.P. (C) No. 4357 of 2017
                            -----

1.Ramchandra Burman

2.Vakil Bhagat @ Vakil Dome

3.Dhiren Saha

4.Suresh Mahto Petitioners Vs.

1.The State of Jharkhand

2.The Commissioner, Santhal Paragana Division, Dumka

3.The Deputy Commissioner (D.C.), Sahibganj

4.The Sub-Divisional Officer (S.D.O), Rajmahal, Sahibganj

5.The Circle Officer, (C.O), Rajmahal, Sahibganj

6.The Registrar, Distt. Registration Office, Sahibganj

7.The Sub-Registrar, Distt. Registration Office, Sahibganj

8.Bharat Prasad Singh

9.Keshav Singh ... ... ... Respondents

-----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

-----

For the Petitioner : Mr. Gautam Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, S.C. IV

-----

Order No. 03 : Dated 14th October, 2019 This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India whereby and whereunder the order dated 05.05.2012 passed in Rev. Misc. Appeal No. 475/1994-95 has been assailed.

It is admitted case of the petitioner, as would appear from Annexure 5/1, the report submitted by Revenue Clerk dated 28.07.2012 to the effect that the required instructions have been sought for from the higher authorities in this regard.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has tried to impress upon the Court that they are in possession of the land in question, therefore, appropriate order may be passed.

Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, learned S.C. IV appearing for the respondents-State of Jharkhand by questioning the locus 2 of the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners were never been party before the revenue authorities as they have no locus to assail the said order, so far as ground of adverse possession, which the petitioners are agitating in this writ petition, the same cannot be adjudicated by the writ Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Upon this, learned counsel for the petitioner has sought for permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach before the appropriate forum for redressal of their grievances.

The said submission has not been objected to by the learned counsel for the respondents-State.

In view thereof, this Court deem it fit and proper to allow the aforesaid prayer of the petitioner.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid.

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) Alankar/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court