Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 878 (JHR)

Chhotey Lall Modi v. State of Jharkhand

2009-06-25

D.K.SINHA, M.Y.EQBAL

body2009
JUDGMENT: This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 31.10.2008 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar in Misc. Case No. 10 of 2007 declaring that the portion of Plot No.647 upon which a Saheed Aashram situate is part and parcel of Jamabandi No.519, by setting aside the order dated 24.12.2004. On 15.4.2009 when the writ petition was placed before the learned Single Judge, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is a Public Interest Litigation. On the submission of the learned counsel, this case has been placed before us. Admitted facts are that the order was passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar on 24.12.2004 setting aside the Jamabandi running in the name of respondent No.7. Since respondent No.7 was not a party to the proceeding in which the order was passed, he moved this Court by filing a writ petition being W.P.(C) No.6672 of 2005. Learned Single Judge quashed the said order dated 24.12.2004 holding that since said order was passed in absence of respondent No.7, the same was illegal and wholly without jurisdiction. However, learned Single Judge further held that any change made in the revenue register on the basis of order dated 24.12.2004 is bad in law and the entry in the revenue register, which was existing in the record before passing the said impugned order, was restored. Aggrieved by the said order, State preferred L.P.A. which was dismissed. The present petitioner filed review petition before the Division Bench of this Court being Civil Review No.49 of 2008 on the ground that the petitioner was not a party in the L.P.A. Division Bench of this Court by order dated 9.9.2008 dismissed the review petition. However, the Court observed that petitioner will have ample opportunity to challenge the order, if the same is implemented. It appears that after the aforesaid order was passed by the learned Single Judge, Deputy Commissioner took up the matter and after giving opportunity to both the petitioner and respondent No.7, passed a speaking order, copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-11 to the writ petition which is impugned herein. In the background of whether the Jamabandi running in the name of respondent No.7 is legal and valid. In the background of whether the Jamabandi running in the name of respondent No.7 is legal and valid. The impugned order dated 31.10.2008 passed by the Depthe aforesaid facts, prima facie we are of the view that the aforesaid order cannot be challenged either by filing a writ petition or by way of Public Interest Litigation. As a matter of fact, it is a dispute relating to the land. This Court cannot decide the question as touty Commissioner can be challenged only before the statutory forum of appeal or the dispute can be decided by the Civil Court of Competent jurisdiction. Both the remedies are available to the petitioner, which can be availed in accordance with law.