JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. V.K. Prasad, learned counsel assisted by Ms. Baxi Bibha, advocates appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr. A.K. Singh, J.C. to S.C. Mines, Advocate appearing for the State. 3. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner mainly for the following reliefs: (i) For quashing the order Dated 20.08.2010 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra, in Appeal No. 63/2006, which according to the petitioner is in complete derogation of the order dated 05.12.2006 passed in W.P.(C) No. 3687 of 2002, whereby this Hon’ble court remitted back the matter to the Respondent No. 2 . (ii) For quashing the entire proceeding of the so called “Suspicious Jamabandi Case No. 84/1995-96”, in respect of the lands of Khata No. 45, Plot No. 881, P.S.-Chatra, District-Hazaribag (Now Chatra) purchased by the petitioner's mother, Bhuneshwari Devi, under registered deed dated 01.04.1953, of which Jamabandi was duly opened in 1953, and rent was continuously realized by the State for over 30 years; 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset while referring Annexure-1 of the writ petition submits that the mother of the writ petitioner had filed the writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 3687 of 2002 relating to cancellation of jamabandi and this Court disposed of the matter vide order dated 5.12.2006 whose operative part is quoted hereinbelow for ready reference :- “Since this writ petition is pending for more than four years, instead of directing the respondents 2, 3 and 4 to file counter affidavit, the matter is remitted back to the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra to enquire whether petitioner produced the original documents pursuant to the notice Annexure-4 and if she produced the same, whether the order of cancellation of jamabandi has been passed after considering them. If the Deputy Commissioner finds hat petitioner did not produce her documents or if he finds that documents produced were considered, he will communicate this to the petitioner and the matter ends. However, if he finds that petitioner produced documents, but they were not considered, he will direct the concerned officer to consider them and pass a reasoned order, in accordance with law as early as possible. Petitioner will produce a copy of this order before the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra within four weeks. With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.” 5. Petitioner will produce a copy of this order before the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra within four weeks. With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.” 5. Thereafter, the counsel for the petitioner submits after remand the case was numbered as appeal no 63 of 2006. The counsel referred to the order dated 05.10.2007 in Appeal no 63/2006 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra at page 100 of the writ petition, which reads as follows:- “…………. Appellant has shown original documents today which this court compared with the photocopies. The original papers have been returned to the appellant. This Court directs officer in-charge record room to compare the records available with the documents produced & send his clear comments to the undersigned”; 6. The counsel for the petitioner by referring to para 32 of the writ petition submits that the Deputy Commissioner , Chatra in the said proceedings thereafter asked the Divisional Forest Officer, South Division, Chatra to send the status report about the lands, but no report was sent. On 13.11.2007, the then Deputy Commissioner, Chatra, issued last reminder to the Divisional Forest Officer to send report on 27.11.2008, otherwise court would take that seriously. Between 23.10.2007 and 19.08.2008 several dates were given but the Divisional Forest Officer did not comply with the order of the Deputy Commissioner passed on 27.11.2008. In the meantime, the mother of the petitioner namely Bhuneshwari Devi died on 30.06.2009 and substitution was allowed on 11.08.2009. 7. The specific case of the petitioner is that the order dated 05.10.2007 which was passed pursuant to the order dated 05.12.2006 passed in W.P.(C) No. 3687 of 2002 was not complied by the concerned officer. In as much as, no such comments were given by the concerned officer regarding the documents which was admittedly filed by the petitioner and whose photo copies is on the record which is apparent as per order dated 05.10.2007. The petitioner submits that thereafter the impugned order dated 20.08.2010 has been passed in haste without caring for the earlier order passed in the records and without complying with the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 3687 of 2002. 8. Accordingly, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter should be remanded back to Deputy Commissioner, Chatra for fresh consideration after considering the material on record which are admittedly on record as is mentioned in order dated 05.10.2007. 9. 8. Accordingly, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter should be remanded back to Deputy Commissioner, Chatra for fresh consideration after considering the material on record which are admittedly on record as is mentioned in order dated 05.10.2007. 9. Counsel for the respondents submits that the matter may be remanded to the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra for fresh consideration within a stipulated time frame . 10. Considering the facts and circumstances, of this case and without entering into the merits to the matter, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 20.08.2010 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra in appeal no 63 of 2006 as the same has been apparently passed without complying with the direction contained in order dated 5.12.2006 passed in W.P.(C) No. 3687 of 2002. 11. From the perusal of the records of this case, this court finds that on 05.10.2007 the petitioner had shown the original documents to the Deputy Commissioner which was compared by the said authority with the photo copies of the original and were returned to the appellants. There was direction issued to the Officer In charge of the record room to compare the record and produce his clear comments to the Deputy Commissioner. From the perusal of the impugned order dated 20.08.2010, it appears that the order dated 05.10.2007 has not been taken care of while passing the impugned order. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 20.08.2010 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra as contained the Annexure -17 of the writ petition is, hereby, set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra for passing fresh order after due compliance of the directions/observations made in the order dated 5.12.2006 passed in W.P.(C) No. 3687 of 2002 and also after taking report/comments from the concerned officer as directed in order dated 05.10.2007 passed in appeal no. 63/2006 by the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra on 26.02.2018 with a copy of the order and thereupon, the deputy Commissioner, Chatra shall disposed of appeal no. 63 of 2006 after hearing the parties and considering the material on record within a period of three months the from date of production a copy of this order. 12. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions.