Jharkhand High Court
Gopi Krishna Modi & Ors vs State Of Jharkdhand & Ors on 8 February, 2019
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No.5702 of 2018
--------
Gopi Krishna Modi & Ors. ...... Petitioners
Versus
State of Jharkdhand & Ors. ...... Respondents
-------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
-------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Kalyan Roy, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Rajiv Anand, Adv.
03/Dated 08th February, 2019
This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the notices as contained under (Annexure-2 series) issued by Respondent No.4 against the petitioner under Section 3 of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 is under challenged.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are title holders of the land by virtue of Khatiyan and rent is being accepted by the State Government, but in the meanwhile, notices have been issued treating the said land as public land, asking the petitioners to give their response as to why they be not evicted.
It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that in terms of the said show cause notice, the reply has been given along with the relevant documents but without for hearing, the decision has been taken treating the said land as public land in view of the provision of Section 5, therefore, vital right of providing an opportunity of hearing with respect of title over the said land, has been snatched away.
It has been contended that now the authorities are bent upon evict the petitioner from the said premises.
Mr. Rajiv Anand, learned G.A. appearing for the State of Jharkhand has sought for two weeks' time to seek instructions and file counter affidavit. An Interim Relief Learned counsel for the petitioner has sought for interim relief on the ground that the relevant documents showing their title over the land in question has been placed before the authority concerned but without giving an opportunity of hearing and without any order being in his knowledge under Section 5 of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Land, now the authorities are bent upon to evict, therefore, since the Sate is seeking time for filing counter affidavit, at least in the meanwhile, petitioners may be 2 protected otherwise they will suffer irreparable loss and injury.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the pleading made in the writ petition as well as the interlocutory application it appears that the petitioners have tried to satisfy the authority who have issued the notice treating the land which is in possession of the petitioners as public land but as the petitioners submits that there is no final decision taken by the authority declaring the land as a public land by having justification under Section 5 of the BPLE Act, 1956 and since the Court is directing the learned counsel for the State Government to seek instruction and file counter affidavit therefore till the next date the protection to the petitioners is required to be ordered.
In view thereof, the status quo as exits today shall be maintained as exists today till the next date.
As prayed for by the State, list this case on 06.03.2019.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) Madhav