Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 994 (JHR)

Suphal Gour v. State Of Jharkhand

2018-05-02

ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

body2018
JUDGMENT Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J. – Heard Mr. S.K. Ughal, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr. Ashish Kumar Thakur, A.C. to S.C. (L&C) appearing for the respondents nos. 1,2,3 and 5. 3. Heard Mr. Arpan Mishra, counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 4(i) and 4(ii). 4. With the consent of the parties, matter is taken up for final disposal. 5. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- (i) For direction upon the respondent no. 3 Circle Officer to certify and show cause before this Hon''ble Court as to why he is sitting tight over the matter relating to mutation of the raiyat land in the names of the petitioners recorded under khata no. 226, bearing plot no. 774, area measuring 1.94 acres situated at mouza Bhilai Pahari P.S. M.G.M. District: East Singhbhum, Title of which has been declared in the names of the petitioners vide a judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 57/2006; (ii) For direction upon the respondent no. 3 Circle Officer in particular to pass immediately and forthwith the necessary orders on the application filed by the petitioners for mutation of the land in question by exercising the powers vested upon him; (iii) For prohibiting the concerned respondents from taking any coercive steps against the petitioners keeping in view the findings of the court of Civil Judge, Senior Division-V, at Jamshedpur in Title Suit No. 57/2006 which has declared the right, title, interest and possession of the petitioners in respect to the lands in question; 6. Counsel for the petitioner submits that application for mutation was filed on 10.06.2012 on the basis of the judgment passed in Title Suit, but the same was kept pending by the Circle Officer Jamshedpur and reminder was also filed before the said authority on 16.04.2015, but no order has been passed on the application for mutation which has been filed by the petitioner. 7. Counsel for the respondent state submits that the counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents and submits that the writ petition is fit to be dismissed in view of the fact that ex-parte decree obtained by the petitioners are not against those persons whose names are running in Register-II. 7. Counsel for the respondent state submits that the counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents and submits that the writ petition is fit to be dismissed in view of the fact that ex-parte decree obtained by the petitioners are not against those persons whose names are running in Register-II. He also submits that specific stand has been taken by the respondents that the petitioner''s father had no occasion to reclaim 1.41 acres of land in contravention of Section 62 of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act ,1908 and further alleged relinquishment of the said land by Rameshwar Modak is self contradictory. He further submits that an oral relinquishment does not pass any title. 8. Counsel for the private respondents submits that the private respondents have serious objection to the application filed by the petitioner before the Circle Officer. He further submits that he may be permitted to appear before the Circle Officer, Jamshedpur and he may be heard before passing any order on the application filed by the petitioner. 9. After hearing counsel for the parties and after considering the materials available on record this court finds that the application for mutation was filed by the petitioner as back as in the year 2012 for which reminder was also filed by filing representation in the year 2015 but no order either rejecting the application for mutation or allowing the mutation has been passed by the Circle Officer, Jamshedpur. 10. Considering the fact that the application for mutation has been filed before the Circle Officer and legal obligation is upon the authority to decide the same in accordance with law and the same cannot be permitted to be kept pending. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent no. 3-Circle Officer, Jamshedpur is directed to pass appropriate order on the application for mutation which has been filed by the petitioner after hearing counsel for the petitioner as well as private respondents in this case within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 12. It is made clear that this court has not gone into the merits of the case. 13. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction.