Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 274 (JHR)

Durga Ram, son of late Somar Ram v. State of Jharkhand

2017-02-09

D.N.PATEL, RATNAKER BHENGRA

body2017
Order : D.N. Patel, J. 1. This Public Interest Litigation has been preferred with the following prayers: “For a direction upon respondent authority to remove the illegal encroachment of common tank namely Sunder Talab from the hands of Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 as it was used by the local people of Giridih town for different purpose, having J.B.N.549 of Ward No. 1 Holding No. 338 and be further pleased to direct the authority to implement the memo no. 509 dated 16.3.2015 issued by D.C Giridih in the light of representation dated 15.3.2015 and also direct the respondents to inquire about the other tanks not to encroach by some one like land Mafiiya situated at Giridih town for the purpose of people in mass ” 2. Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that this writ petition has been preferred for removal of encroachment of common tank popularly known as “Sunder Talab” which is situated in the district of Giridih. The encroachment is alleged to have been made by respondents 6 and 7. It appears that there are lots of litigations filed by the respondents No. 6 and 7 with the government about the right, title and interest upon the property narrated in the writ petition, which is known as “Sunder Talab”. It further appears from the facts of the case that earlier order was passed by the Circle Officer, Giridih dated 16th/17th March, 2015. Against which respondent nos. 6 and 7 had preferred writ petition (civil) No. 1184 of 2015 and writ petition (civil) No. 1264 of 2015, which were dismissed by the learned Single Judge, vide orders dated 30th March, 2015 and 9th April, 2015 respectively. 3. Being aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied by the said orders, L.P.A was preferred, bearing L.P.A. No. 220 of 2015 which was also disposed of vide order dated 22nd April, 2015. 4. It further appears that consistently respondent nos. 6 and 7 are claiming their right, title, interest and ownership of the property in question and time and again, orders are being passed by the Revenue authority. Encroachment was ordered to be removed by the Revenue Authority. Against which Encroachment Appeal 21 of 2015 has also been preferred by respondent nos. 6 and 7. This Encroachment Appeal has been dismissed by the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih vide order 19th September, 2016. Encroachment was ordered to be removed by the Revenue Authority. Against which Encroachment Appeal 21 of 2015 has also been preferred by respondent nos. 6 and 7. This Encroachment Appeal has been dismissed by the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih vide order 19th September, 2016. All these facts, dates and numbers have been given as per the submission canvassed by the counsel for the petitioner. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts and looking to the counter affidavit filed by the State, it appears that property, which is popularly known as “Sunder Talab”, in the district of Giridih, over plot no. 215, ad-measuring 15 decimals of land, for which, right, title and interest has been claiming by respondent nos. 6 and 7 by teeth and nail. Proceeding are going one by one. Certain orders have also been passed by the Revenue authority as submitted by the counsel for the petitioner. In this set of circumstance, this Court will be extremely slow in making any observation either in favour of this petitioner or in favour of respondent nos. 6 and 7 nor this court is going to even prima facie decide whether “Sunder Talab” is a governmental property or a private property. This fact is bound to be established by cogent and convincing evidence before the trial court or before the appropriate authority in accordance with law when somebody is claiming right, title and ownership of the property. For such property, no direction can be given for removal of the encroachment; otherwise, it will tantamount to prejudging the whole issue and hence, there is no substance in this Public Interest Litigation. Therefore, the same is dismissed.