Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 1066 (JHR)

Abanikant Roy v. State of Jharkhand

2021-12-20

RAJESH SHANKAR

body2021
JUDGMENT : 1. At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, remaining defect(s), as pointed out by the office, is ignored for the present. 2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 13th May, 2019 (Annxure-7 to the writ petition) passed by the Circle Officer, Patratu - respondent no.4, whereby the representation preferred by the petitioner in pursuance of the order dated 23rd July, 2018 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.1413 of 2018 for acceptance of rent and issuance of rent receipt in his favour has been rejected. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondent no.4 to accept rent and to issue rent receipt in his favour with respect to the land, appertaining to Khata no.27, plot nos.1 & 2, Thana no.42, measuring an area of 5.49 1/2 acres, situated at Mouja Matkoma. 3. It appears that the petitioner had earlier moved this Court by filing a writ petition being W.P.(C) No.1413 of 2018, seeking direction on the respondents to accept rent and to issue rent receipt to him for the land in question as well as for issuance of direction upon the respondents not to dispossess him from the said land. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 23rd July, 2018, giving liberty to the petitioner to prefer a representation before the Circle Officer, Patratu-respondent no.4 agitating his grievance in detail and the said respondent in turn was directed to pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a time frame after verifying the relevant records and providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. In pursuance of the said order of this court, the petitioner filed a representation before the respondent no.4, who vide impugned order dated 13th May, 2019 has rejected the same. 4. Mr. A.K. Thakur, learned A.C. to A.A.G.-III appearing on behalf of the respondents, at the outset, submits that the petitioner has efficacious remedy of preferring appeal against the order dated 13th May, 2019 under Section 15 of the Bihar Tenant’s Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973 before the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Ramgarh. 5. 4. Mr. A.K. Thakur, learned A.C. to A.A.G.-III appearing on behalf of the respondents, at the outset, submits that the petitioner has efficacious remedy of preferring appeal against the order dated 13th May, 2019 under Section 15 of the Bihar Tenant’s Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973 before the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Ramgarh. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view that the petitioner has efficacious remedy of preferring appeal before the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Ramgarh under Section 15 of the said Act, 1973 against the order dated 13th May, 2019 passed by the respondent no.4, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed as not maintainable. 6. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to take appropriate alternative recourse as provided under law. 7. I.A. No.7314 of 2021 is also disposed of.