Jharkhand High Court
Dumni Murmu @ D. Murmu vs The State Of Jharkhand & Others on 17 September, 2019
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (C) No. 3800 of 2019
Dumni Murmu @ D. Murmu ... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand & Others ... Respondents
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shankar Lal Agarwal, Advocate
For the Respondent-State : Mr. Parth Jalan, A.C. to G.A-IV
-----
02/17.09.2019. Notice dated 27.11.2018 has been issued in BPLE Case No. 07 of 2018- 19 by the Circle Officer, Gamharia, who is working in the capacity of Collector under Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956.
Mr. Shankar Lal Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner by referring the impugned notice, has submitted that notice under Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 has been issued without passing an order as required to be passed under Sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Act, 1956.
Further submission has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that reference of Sub-section (5) of Section 2 of the Act, 1956 has been made in the impugned notice, but as would appear from Sub-section (5) of Section 2 of the Act, 1956, the same is defined as public land and merely on the basis of definition of public land and without any adjudication by proceeding and without giving opportunity of hearing as provided under Section 5 of the Act, 1956, notice under Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Act, 1956 has been issued and, therefore, the present writ petition has been filed.
This Court, after hearing Mr. Shankar Lal Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and after going through the relevant provisions, is of the view that the Bihar (now Jharkhand) Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 has been carved out to deal with the public land and if any public land is found to be -2- illegally occupied by anybody, a proceeding is required to be initiated by providing an opportunity of hearing and in pursuance to the provision as made under Section 5 of the Act, 1956, declaration of land is to be passed within purview of Sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Act, 1956, failing in compliance of the said declaration will lead to issuance of notice under Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Act, 1956, as would prima facie appears that there is no reference of any declaration supposed to be passed under Sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Act, 1956 merely on the ground that the land being public land without declaring it to be public land, as required to be done under Sub-section (1) of Section 6, notice under Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Act, 1956 has been issued.
Mr. Parth Jalan, learned A.C. to G.A.-IV has sought for time to seek instruction.
The Circle Officer has conferred with the power to act as a Collector under the Act, 1956 meaning thereby he is vested with statutory duty to discharge under the statute and, hence, he should know the provisions of law before exercising the statutory duty, but as has been referred herein above, prima facie, it appears that the Circle Officer, Gamharia, who is working in the capacity of Collector has got no idea of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 and, therefore, this Court is of the view that the concerned Circle Officer is required to appear in person before this Court to establish the reason for issuance of notice.
List this case on 24.09.2019.
Let a copy of this order be handed over to learned A.C. to G.A.-IV.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) Ajay/