Krishna Prasad Sahu vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 3142 Jhar

                                              1


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                        W. P. (C) No. 4473 of 2017
         Krishna Prasad Sahu                .... .. ... Petitioner(s)
                        Versus
         1.The State of Jharkhand.
         2.The Chief Secretary, State of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
         3.The Deputy Commissioner, Palamau.
         4.The Superintendent of Police, Palamau.
         5.Kiran Kuer
         6.Abhishek Kumar Pandey
         7.Vijay Kumar Pandey
         8.Sunita Devi
         9.Sweta Devi
         10. Rajmani Pandey                  .. ... ...Respondent(s)
                        ...........

CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY .........

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mantra Narayan Thakur, Advocate For the State : Mr. Amitesh Kumar Geasen, AC to AAG-IA For the Resp. 6 & 7 : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Advocate ......

05/ 24.08.2023. Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

1. The instant Writ Petition (Civil) has been filed for appropriate direction commanding upon the respondents to vacate the illegal and unauthorized possession over Gairmajarua Khas land for public use in Mauza- Chaura, Thana- Tarhasi, District- Palamau, Khata No.18, Khesra No.41, area 49 decimals by Kiran Kuar and others.

2. It is submitted that as per the case of the petitioner, Respondent nos, 4 to 9 somehow managed the Settlement Officer, Palamau and had secured illegal jamabandi of the land in their names which has already been cancelled by the Divisional Commissioner. They had filed Title Suit No.14 of 1999 with respect to the said land, but the same has been dismissed by the learned court below vide judgment dated 11.03.2019.

3. Counter-affidavit has been filed by the Circle Officer in which it has been stated in Para-9 that Encroachment Case No.1 of 2018-19 was initiated against the private respondents in which no action was taken because of the pendency of the said Title Suit and the same has already been dismissed.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the private respondents that against the dismissal of the suit, private respondents have already preferred First Appeal vide Civil Appeal No.18 of 2019 which is pending before the learned Principal District Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj. The answering respondents have settled possession over the land, in question since long , as such, without any due process of law, they cannot be evicted.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusing the materials available on record, it appears that the private respondents who filed the said

Title Suit have lost the case as the suit has been dismissed. The earlier encroachment case was stalled because of the pendency of the said Title Suit. After disposal of the suit, there cannot be presumption of prima-facie title over the suit property in favour of the private respondents.

However, in view of the alternative remedy available, this Court is of the view that the Petitioner has efficacious remedy under General law and therefore this Court cannot issue direction considering the in view of the disputed question of title. The petitioner is at liberty to move before the appropriate authority under the General law for removing the encroachment. If the petitioner files any application before the competent authority, the same will be disposed of as expeditiously as possible without any delay, preferably within a period of three months, without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

The instant Writ Petition is disposed of.

Pending I.As., are disposed of.

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sandeep/

Uploaded.

Uploaded.