Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 741 (JHR)

Babita Kumari v. State Of Jharkhand Through Deputy Commissioner

2019-03-26

SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

body2019
JUDGMENT Sujit Narayan Prasad, J. - The writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the notice dated 23.01.2019 issued by Sub-Divisional Officer-cumSub-Divisional Magistrate, Deoghar is under challenge whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been called upon to appear before the said authority on 06.02.2019 and show cause as to why such encroachment shall not be removed. 2 . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the due objection has been made against the aforesaid notice stating therein that the land has not been encroached upon by the petitioner, which is still lying pending. 3 . He therefore submits that an appropriate direction may be passed upon the said authority to dispose of the aforesaid objection in accordance with law. 4 . Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned AC to SC (L&C)-I has fairly submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of directing the concerned authority to decide the objection, if not already decided, within a reasonable period. 5 . Upon such submission and without entering into the merit of the claim of the petitioner and with their consent, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Deoghar to dispose of the objection, if any, if not already disposed of, filed by the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order by providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other affected parties, if any, in accordance with law. 6 . Accordingly the writ petition stands disposed of.