Bhumi Adhigrahan Visthapan Avam ... vs The Union Of India Through Its ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3224 Jhar

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    W.P.(PIL) No. 2258 of 2021

        Bhumi Adhigrahan Visthapan Avam Punarvas
        Kisan Samiti through its President Gaurav Singh.      .....Petitioner
                                        Versus
        The Union of India through its Secretary Ministry of Mines and
        Steel & Others.                                   .....Respondents

         Coram: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
                  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
                              ---------

For the Petitioner : Mr. R.R. Tiwari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sachin Kumar, AAG

-----

05/2-9-2021 We have heard at some length the arguments advanced by Mr. R.R.

Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sachin Kumar, the learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State of Jharkhand.

In order to proceed further, it is necessary to formulate certain questions of law for the present.

(a) Whether the petitioner can be said to be an aggrieved person and thereby permit him to proceed further in this Public Interest Litigation?

(b) Whether the Public Interest Litigation in its present form, which appears to be in the garb of a Letters Patent Appeal, is maintainable or not?

(c) Whether a person, who is not a party to the civil dispute, can prefer an appeal if aggrieved by the judgment passed in the civil proceeding?

(d) Whether in a Public Interest Litigation a Court can sit in appeal over a judgment passed by a competent court and if yes, under what circumstances?

Learned counsel for the respective parties is directed to address these issues formulated on the next date of hearing.

Let this case be listed on 9th September, 2021. By that time, Mr. Sachin Kumar, learned AAG, shall file an affidavit to be sworn by a competent officer not below the rank of a Principal Secretary, Department of Mines & Geology stating therein as to whether the State has preferred a Letters Patent Appeal against the order passed in WPC No. 2013 of 2020 or whether the State is contemplating to prefer an appeal, as indicated above.

If the State does not intend to prefer an appeal, the same must also be indicated in the affidavit to be filed by the Principal Secretary, Department of Mines & Geology.

It is also made clear that if the State contemplates to prefer an appeal, it must indicate as to by which time, the said appeal would be preferred.

List accordingly.

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay,J)

(Anil Kumar Choudhary,J)

Rakesh/-