Sourabh Prasad vs State Of Jharkhand Through Its ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 824 Jhar

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                         W.P.(C) No. 3828 of 2019
                Sourabh Prasad                                         -Petitioner
                                            Versus
                1. State of Jharkhand through its Additional Chief
                   Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative
                   Reforms and Rajbhasa, Ranchi
                2. Office of Hon'ble Lokayukta, Jharkhand, through its
                   Secretary, Ranchi
                3. Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi
                4. District Land Acquisition Officer, Ranchi
                5. Mansha Singh @ Rajesh Singh
                6. Ghasia Oraon                                        --Respondents
                                            ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---

For the Petitioner : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Prambir Singh Bajaj, Adv.

For the Respondent no. 2 : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. For the Resp.-State : Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, Sr. S.C.-I Mr. Anish Kumar Mishra, A.C to Sr.S.C.-I

--

04/21.02.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

"(a) For quashing the order dated 24.06.2019 passed by the Hon'ble Lokayukta in Case No. 01/Lok (Vividh)12/2018 (Annexure-10 hereto) whereby inter alia its has been recommended that action as per law must be initiated against the Petitioner and it has been further recommended that criminal proceedings and certificate proceedings be restored to for recovery of the compensation amount;

(b) During the pendency of the instant writ petition for an appropriate interim order staying the operation/execution and implementation of the aforesaid order dated 24.06.2019 and for a further interim order directing the Respondents not to take any coercive action against the Petitioner during the pendency of the instant writ petition."

3. It appears that the land has been acquired and compensation has been paid to one Ghasia Oraon (Respondent no. 6). The present petitioner was the District Land Acquisition Officer, Ranchi at the relevant point of time. A complaint has been made on that basis. Case no. 01/Lok(Vividh)12/2018 has been initiated before the Hon'ble Lokayukta, Jharkhand and after hearing the parties and making necessary enquiry, the impugned order dated 24.06.2019 has been passed. The last portion of the order is quoted hereinbelow:

"mijksDr rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij vkjksih rRdkyhu Hkw&vtZu inkf/kdkjh] jkWaph lEizfr vuqe.My inkf/kdkjh] cfl;k] xqeyk ds fo:) fof/k lEer dkjZokbZ visf{kr gSA vr% vij eq[; lfpo]

Jh lkSjHk izlkn] rRdkyhu Hkw&vtZu inkf/kdkjh] jkWaph lEizfr

vuqe.My inkf/kdkjh] cfl;k] xqeyk ds fo:) i= izkfIr ls pkj

h eqvkotk

fuyke i= okn dh izfdz;k Hkh vius Lrj ls dj ldrs gSaA"

[email protected]& yksdk;qDr

4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that Hon'ble Lokayukta, Jharkhand can only recommend, he cannot mandate the authority for taking one or particular action and for this purpose he has relied upon a judgment in the case of Ashok Kumar Das Vs. The State of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary & Anr. reported in 2020 (1) JLJR 303.

5. Learned counsel for the State and other parties have not disputed this legal proposition so far as jurisdiction of the Lokayukta, Jharkhand is concerned.

6. In view of the above argument of the parties and the fact that the issue has already been settled, the present writ petition is hereby disposed of clarifying that the order dated 14.06.2019 should be treated as a recommendation. The concerned authority is free to act or not to act depending upon its analysis of the fact of the case and the involvement of the present writ petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

(Rajesh Kumar, J) jk