Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1241 (JHR)

Arjun Prasad v. State of Jharkhand

2022-10-17

RAJESH SHANKAR

body2022
ORDER : 1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to refrain from taking any coercive step with regard to forcible dispossession of the petitioner from the land appertaining to plot no.45, Khata No.196, measuring an area of 6 decimals, situated at Mauja- Cantonment, Pargana- Champa, P.S. Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh along with house and other structures standing over the said land. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said land was purchased by the petitioner through a registered sale deed dated 07.11.2009. The petitioner got his name mutated in the revenue record and he was issued rent receipt. Moreover, the petitioner was also issued holding tax receipt by the Municipal Corporation, Hazaribagh. Thereafter, he constructed a house and other structures over the said land after making considerable investment where he has been residing along with his family. It is further submitted that the respondent authorities have forcibly demolished the compound wall erected over the said land without issuing any notice to the petitioner and are also bent upon to demolish his house standing over the same forcibly without issuing any notice in this regard or affording any opportunity of hearing to him. The action of the respondent authorities in demolishing the said wall of the petitioner is highly arbitrary and against the mandate of law. It is also submitted that the land in question is not a public land within the meaning of section 2(3) of the Bihar (now Jharkhand) Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 and the respondent authorities have exceeded their jurisdiction in taking coercive step with regard to demolition of compound wall of the petitioner’s house without issuing any notice to him. It is further submitted that during pendency of the writ petition, few pillars standing over the said land of the petitioner have been demolished despite the ad-interim stay granted by this Court for which Contempt Case (Civil) No.569 of 2021 has separately been filed by the petitioner. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that Original Application No.99/2016/EZ (M.A. No.02/17) (Savita Kumari Vs. State of Jharkhand and Others) was filed in National Green Tribunal (N.G.T.) against illegal obstruction of natural flow of stream of ‘Jhinjharia Nala’ with its outfall into ‘Dhobia Pond’. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that Original Application No.99/2016/EZ (M.A. No.02/17) (Savita Kumari Vs. State of Jharkhand and Others) was filed in National Green Tribunal (N.G.T.) against illegal obstruction of natural flow of stream of ‘Jhinjharia Nala’ with its outfall into ‘Dhobia Pond’. In the said case, N.G.T. vide its order dated 10.06.2020 directed to constitute a committee, comprising of (i) the Regional Office, MoEF & CC; (ii) the Regional Office, CPCB; (iii) the Jharkhand Pollution Control Board (State PCB); and (iv) the District Collector, Hazaribagh to jointly visit the site in question and to assess the situation in the light of the facts as stated in the said O.A. as well as to propose action to be taken for mitigating the situation indicating the appropriate authorities to deal with it. In the meantime it was directed that no further construction would be undertaken in the area by encroaching the water body and the stream. Disposing of the solid waste and discharging sewage in the water bodies was also prohibited. Thereafter, a report of the said Committee constituted in terms of the order dated 10.06.2020 was received by the NGT through the Jharkhand Pollution Control Board. The NGT in its order dated 06.08.2020 mentioned various facts observed by the said committee during inspection and directed the Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Jharkhand, the Municipal Corporation, Hazaribagh and the State Pollution Control Board to prepare action plan for dealing with all the issues projected in the said report, so that no untreated water flows into ‘Dhobia Pond’ and “Jhinjharia Nala’ to be prevented from being a receptacle of the untreated sewage, domestic waste water and solid waste. It was further directed that the action plan would also include urgent steps for removal of encroachments. It is further submitted that 7.50 acres of land appertaining to Khata No.196, Plot No. 45, Thana No. 157 has been shown as Gairmajurwa Khas land, out of which 0.06 acre was purchased by the petitioner whose jamabandi was put on hold/suspended till further order vide letter no.1480 dated 29.12.2014 issued by the respondent no.5. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. The petitioner seeks direction of this court to restrain the respondents from dispossessing him or removing any structure from the land in question without affording any opportunity of hearing to him. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. The petitioner seeks direction of this court to restrain the respondents from dispossessing him or removing any structure from the land in question without affording any opportunity of hearing to him. 5. The thrust of the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has valid title over the said land having purchased the same through registered sale deed dated 07.11.2009 and as such the order of NGT has no bearing in the present case. Further claim of the petitioner is that the revenue authorities have already mutated the said land in the name of the petitioner after making due enquiry with regard to factum of possession of the petitioner over the said land, as would be evident from the order-sheet of Mutation Case no.2016 of 2013-14. Thereafter, the jamabandi of the said land has been running in the name of the petitioner and as such he has not encroached ‘Dhobia Pond’ as well as ‘Jhinjharia Nala’. Moreover, distance between Dhobi Pond and house of the petitioner is more than one and half kilometres, which also falsifies the stand of the respondent authorities. 6. The contention of the respondents is that the petitioner has obstructed the flow of Jhinjharia Nala. This court does not intend to go into factual claims raised by the parties, however, since the assertion of the petitioner is that he has purchased the said land through registered sale deed and jamabandi of the said land has also been opened in his name, even if the contention of the respondents is accepted that the nature of the land is Gairmajurwa, then also before dispossessing the petitioner, due process of law is required to be followed which includes affording opportunity of hearing to him. 7. This Court has perused the order of National Green Tribunal passed in O.A No.99 of 2016, wherein learned Tribunal has directed the respondents to prepare action plan for removal of encroachment as well as for other remedial measures for preventing untreated sewage, domestic waste water and solid waste in ‘Dhobia pond’ and ‘Jhinjharia Nala’ and in the meantime, the respondents were directed to prevent any further encroachment in the water body and to stop disposing of the solid waste and discharge of sewage in the water bodies. 8. 8. This Court, therefore, is of the view that the respondents cannot evict the petitioner from the land in question or to demolish any structure made thereupon without following due process of law. 9. Since as per the record, the compound wall of the petitioner has already been demolished by the respondents, no further demolition shall be made without affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and passing appropriate order in accordance with law. 10. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. 11. I.A. No.602 of 2022 also stands disposed of.