Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1360 (JHR)

Krishna Ballabh Singh v. State Of Bihar

2003-12-08

AMARESHWAR SAHAY

body2003
ORDER Amareshwar Sahay, J. 1. Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. G.P. II for the State. 2. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application is for quashing of the order as contained in Annexures 6, 7 and 8 i.e. the order dated 2.12.1998 passed by the L.R.D.C., Hazaribagh, the order dated 24.1.1997 passed by the deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh against the order of the L.R.D.C., Hazaribagh and the order dated 9.6.1997 passed by the Commissioner, North Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh in Revision against the appellate order of the Additional Collector. 3. The facts of the matter in short is that the wife of the petitioner Shrimati Sulochana Devi filed an application before the Circle Officer, Churchu in the district of Hazaribagh with a prayer for fixing rent in her name with regard to several plots of Khata Nos. 80 and 81, total area of 25 and odd acres, solely on the basis of the judgment of the High Court in Criminal Revision arising out of a proceeding under Section 145 Cr PC between one Satyanarayan Singh and the petitioner and others. The claim of the petitioner is that he is coming in possession of the lands in question since long and, therefore, the rent be fixed in his name for the lands in question. From the order as contained in Annexure 6, passed by the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Sadar Hazaribagh, it appears that the land of Khata No. 81 is recorded as Gair Mazarua Khas and the lands of Khata No. 80 has been recorded as Jangal Jhari. The learned L.R.D.C., Hazaribagh hold that the order passed in a proceeding under Section 145, Cr PC was in between Satya Narayan Singh and Krishna Vallabh Singh and in the said proceeding under Section 145, Cr PC the State was not a party and, therefore, it was not binding on the State. 4. It was further held that the applicant have no valid or genuine claim and she was not in physical possession of the lands, since it is a Jangal Jhari and Parti land and thereby the petition/prayer of the applicant for fixing the rent with regard to the lands in question was rejected. 5. 4. It was further held that the applicant have no valid or genuine claim and she was not in physical possession of the lands, since it is a Jangal Jhari and Parti land and thereby the petition/prayer of the applicant for fixing the rent with regard to the lands in question was rejected. 5. On appeal being filed against the order passed by the L.R.D.C., the Additional Collector, Hazaribagh considered the respective case of the parties and came to a definite finding of fact after considering the evidence of record that the land in question was Gair Mozarua and also of the Forest Department and, therefore, it was held that there is no doubt in my mind that the land, in question belonged to the State of Bihar. It was further held that on the basis of the forged and fabricated document, the parties were claiming the said lands. It was further found that those lands were already acquired by the Central Coalfields Limited and consequently the appeal was dismissed. 6. The petitioner filed Revision before the Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh who vide his order dated 9.6.1997 affirmed the order of the Land Reforms Deputy Collector as well as of the Additional Collector. 7. Having heard the parties and also after perusing the orders passed by the L.R.D.C. and the Additional Collector, it appears that the findings of facts have, been arrived at by the Revenue Authorities after fully considering the relevant evidence on record. Nothing has been brought to the notice of the Court so that it can be said that "the findings arrived at by the Revenue Authorities are illegal and perverse. 8. In that view of the matter, I do not find any illegality in the said order. Consequently, this application is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to cost.