Binod Bhagat @ Binod Kumar Bhagat, Son of Late Banwari Bhagat v. State of Jharkhand
2019-01-15
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
body2019
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT : 1. This writ petition has been preferred against the notice dated 27.05.2017 and 09.06.2017 passed by Khas Mahal Officer, Hazaribag whereby and where under the petitioner has been given 14 days time for eviction from the aforesaid premises failing which the premises will be evicted by deputing the Magistrate and the cost incurred on it shall be recovered. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is claiming his right on the basis of settlement Annexure-1 and his right has been decided by the trial court in a decree/judgment passed in Title Suit No.84 of 1992 against which the appeal has been dismissed viz. Title Appeal No.23 of 2004. The State has filed Second Appeal being S.A. No.18 of 2008 but the same has been dismissed for default due to non-compliance of the peremptory order within the prescribed time frame. 3. In the backdrop of such ground it has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that issuance of show cause notice is absolutely improper and the same has been issued without application of mind, i.e. without verifying the decree/judgment passed by competent court of civil jurisdiction deciding the title over the aforesaid land. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State-respondent has submitted that the petitioner can justify his title over the suit land before the Khas Mahal Officer, Hazaribag by producing all the relevant documents, therefore, by passing proper order the writ petition may be disposed of. 5. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and going across the impugned order dated 27.05.2017 (Anexure-5) and 09.06.2017 (Annexure6), it is evident that the petitioner has been given show cause which has been responded by him and the competent authority not being satisfied with the reply has found the petitioner in unauthorised occupation of the said land, therefore, direction has been passed for his eviction. 6. It is evident from the order dated 27.05.2017 that the show cause notice has been issued which has well been responded by the petitioner but from the face of the order it is evident that before coming to the conclusion of declaration of unauthorised occupation by the petitioner over the alleged Government land, no consideration of relevant document is find mentioned, therefore, it cannot be said to be a reasoned order. 7.
7. There is no dispute about the settled position of law that when a valuable right is taken away which leads to civil consequence, issuance of show cause notice is the mandate but admittedly it is not a formality and when the show cause notice is issued by the competent authority, it is the duty to consider it. Consideration means active appreciation of the factual aspect reflecting the mind of the authority by giving reason therein. 8. This Court has not find the appreciation of the factual aspect in the impugned order dated 27.05.2017 and 09.06.2017, therefore, the same are not sustainable in the eye of law and accordingly are quashed. 9. It is also settled that on technicality no relief can be granted to anybody otherwise before coming to the rightful conclusion the party will have to be given benefit of technicality, therefore, the matter needs afresh consideration for by the Khas Mahal Officer, Hazaribag. Hence, the matter is remitted before him to take final decision. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to produce relevant document before him showing and establishing his right over the land in question by giving therein all documents along with an application within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The said authority will decide the matter after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other affected parties, if any, within the period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into merit of the claim of the petitioner and the authority will take decision strictly on the basis of law based upon the relevant document to be brought by the petitioner before him. 12. With these observations, this writ petition stands disposed of.