Shyam Sundar Ram @ Shyam Sunder Ram v. State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms
2025-02-10
RAJESH SHANKAR
body2025
DigiLaw.ai
ORDER: Rajesh Shankar, J. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has the lawful right and possession over the land in question, the details of which have been given in paragraph-8 of the writ petition. 2. It is further submitted that pursuant to the settlement of land in question in favour of the petitioner by the Ex-Landlord vide “Hukumnama” dated 17.03.1952, he was all along in peaceful possession as rightful owner and rent in respect of the said land was also paid. However, after lapse of 17-18 years, Misc. Case No. 11 of 1981-82 was initiated for cancelling the “Jamabandi” running in the name of the petitioner and vide ex- parte order dated 02.04.1981, the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Mahagama, cancelled the said Jamabandi running in the name of the petitioner and dispossessed him from the land in question. Being aggrieved with the said order, the petitioner filed Title Suit No. 01 of 1983 in the court of learned In-charge Officer-II, Dumka, District- Godda seeking declaration of his right, title and interest over the land in question and also for recovery of possession. The said title suit was allowed vide judgment dated 25.05.1995 (decree signed on 27.05.1995) declaring the title of the petitioner over the land in question. 3. It is also submitted that pursuant to passing of the aforesaid judgment passed in Title Suit No. 01 of 1983, a “Basgadi” order dated 19.06.1995 was duly issued by the learned court of In-charge Officer, Dumka, pursuant to which the petitioner was put in possession of the land in question. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the judgment passed in Title Suit No. 01 of 1983 was challenged by the then State of Bihar and Others in Title Appeal No. 06 of 1995 in the court of learned Commissioner, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka, however the said appeal was dismissed vide order dated 29.03.2005 affirming the order passed in Title Suit No. 01 of 1983. Irrespective of the said fact, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mahagama (the respondent no. 3), vide impugned order dated 03.09.2024, has initiated Doubtful Settlement Case No. 01 of 2024 and has referred the matter to the Deputy Commissioner, Godda (the respondent no. 2) for further action in this regard. Under the said compelling circumstance, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 5. Issue notice. 6. Mr.
3), vide impugned order dated 03.09.2024, has initiated Doubtful Settlement Case No. 01 of 2024 and has referred the matter to the Deputy Commissioner, Godda (the respondent no. 2) for further action in this regard. Under the said compelling circumstance, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 5. Issue notice. 6. Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, learned A.C. to A.G., appears and waives notice on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 4. 7. Issue notice to the respondent nos. 5 to 10 under registered cover with A/D as well as through ordinary process for which requisites etc. must be filed by 19.02.2025. 8. Put up this case after six weeks under appropriate heading. 9. In the meantime, the parties shall maintain status-quo as existing today over the land in question.