Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 352 (JHR)

Ishwar Prasad Tiwari v. State of Jharkhand

2025-02-11

RAJESH SHANKAR

body2025
JUDGMENT : Rajesh Shankar, J. No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. 2. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent No.3 to show cause as to how without following the due procedure provided under the provisions of the Jharkhand Public Land Encroachment Act, 2000 and in utter disregard to the principals of natural justice, he has asked the petitioner to remove the encroachment from the land appertaining to Khata No.255, Plot No. 851, Village-Karua Kalan, P.S-Garhwa, District-Garhwa. 3. Mr. Amitesh Kumar Geasen, learned A.C to A.A.G-IA appearing on behalf of the respondents, refers to the relevant paragraphs of the counter affidavit which read as under: ‘’3. That above named petitioner has filed the writ petition for the issuance of writ/order/direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing upon respondent No.03. The respondent No.03 has taken action against the encroacher of the Gair Majarua Aam Rasta land and removed them from the encroached land after taking proper action and proceeding as provided by the Bihar/Jharkhand Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956. The one villager of Village-Karua Kala, P.O-Dumariya, namely, Ramkrishna Tiwari s/o Late Harihar Tiwari filed a petition for removal of encroached land of road on Cadastral Survey Plot No. 851 under Cadastral Survey Khata No. 255 of Village-Karua Kala. The respondent No.3 perused the petition and initiated a proceeding of encroachment vide Encroachment Case No. 06 of 2016-17 and passed an order and directed Halka Karamchari, Anchal Amin and Circle Inspector to submit the real report of this C. S. Plot No. 851. 9. That the contents of para 5 of the writ petition is wrong, false and baseless. The respondent No.3 i.e. Circle Officer, Garhwa has validly and legally initiated a proceeding under the Jharkhand Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 and after proper verification and enquiry, it was found that the public land was encroached. Notice was issued against the encroacher (petitioner) and petitioner appeared before Circle Officer and prayed for re- demarcation. Thereafter, the Circle Officer, following the principles of natural justice, directed the Karamchari, Circle Inspector and Anchal Amin to make re-measurement of that land. In presence of petitioner and other villagers, re-demarcation was made and found that the petitioner had encroached the part of area of Plot No. 851 under Khata No. 255 of Village-Karua Kala, District-Garhwa. 12. Thereafter, the Circle Officer, following the principles of natural justice, directed the Karamchari, Circle Inspector and Anchal Amin to make re-measurement of that land. In presence of petitioner and other villagers, re-demarcation was made and found that the petitioner had encroached the part of area of Plot No. 851 under Khata No. 255 of Village-Karua Kala, District-Garhwa. 12. That contents in para 9 to 13 of the writ petition are mechanical and far from the truth. All contentions made in these paragraphs are repetition, which are replied above directly or impliedly. The respondents have the authority to enquire and initiate proceeding against the encroacher. The petitioner has encroached the public land as Gair Mazarua Aaam Rasta, so respondent No.3 validly initiated a proceeding under the Jharkhand Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 and verification, enquiry and demarcation was done and after giving several opportunities to the petitioner, the encroachment was removed. The encroachment was removed from Plot No. 851 only. The respondent No.3 has not performed any illegal or arbitrary action against the petitioner. Allegation in this regard is baseless and wrong at all.’’ 4. Having heard learned counsel for the respondents and considering that the alleged encroachment made over Plot No. 851 of Village-Karua Kalan has already been removed and Encroachment Case No. 06/2016-17 initiated against the petitioner in this regard has already been disposed of vide order dated 13.05.2017 passed by the respondent No.3, this Court is not inclined to proceed further with the present matter. 5. The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of. 6. The petitioner is however at liberty to take appropriate recourse as available under law against the order dated 13.05.2017 passed by the respondent No.3 in Encroachment Case No. 06/2016-17. 7. Consequently, I.A. No. 5480/2017 also stands disposed of.