Jharkhand High Court
Birsa Oraon & Others vs Union Of India Through The Defense ... on 23 January, 2025
Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
First Appeal No. 451 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 3993 of 2021
Birsa Oraon & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Others ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 455 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 3998 of 2021
Sushil Linda @ Sushil & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 456 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 3999 of 2021
Birsa Oraon @ Birsa & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Others ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 459 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4003 of 2021
Siva Oraon @ Siwa Oraon & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Others ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 463 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4009 of 2021
Mahadev Oraon ... ... Appellant
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 464 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4010 of 2021
Bhola Sahu & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Others ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 465 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4011 of 2021
Bhunu Gope & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 466 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4012 of 2021
Ratho Sahu & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Others ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 467 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4013 of 2021
Bhola Sahu @ Bhola ... ... Appellant
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Others ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 468 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4014 of 2021
2
Most. Sanichariya Devi & Another ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 469 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4015 of 2021
Lilmohan & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 470 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4016 of 2021
Anisul Rahman & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 471 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4017 of 2021
Indar Hazam (Thakur) & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Others ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 472 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4018 of 2021
Anisul@ Anilsul Rahman & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 491 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4046 of 2021
3
Mallu @ Mallu Sahu & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 473 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4020 of 2021
Birsa Oraon @ Birsa & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Others ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 474 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4022 of 2021
Ratho Sahu @ Ratho & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 475 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4023 of 2021
Kalawati Devi @ Kalawati & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 477 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4026 of 2021
Gunjar Devi & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 479 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4028 of 2021
4
Mahli Oraon & Another ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 480 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4029 of 2021
Bhola Sahu ... ... Appellant
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Others ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 482 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4033 of 2021
Gunjar Devi ... ... Appellant
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 484 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4035 of 2021
Sahamat Ansari & Others ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 487 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4040 of 2021
Most. Sanicharwa Devi & Another ... ... Appellants
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 489 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4043 of 2021
5
Bhola @ Bhola Sahu ... ... Appellant
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Others ... ... Respondents
And
First Appeal No. 492 of 2018
with
I.A. No. 4047 of 2021
Bhola @ Bhola Sahu ... ... Appellant
Versus
Union of India through The Defense Estate Officer, Danapur
Cantt, Patna, Bihar & Another ... ... Respondents
---
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Mitul Kumar, Advocate
For the Resp. U.O.I : Mr. Anil Kumar, Addl. S.G.I.
: Ms. Chanda Kumari, JC to ASGI
For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Tiwari, SC-I
: Mr. Ankit Kumar, AC to SC-I
: Mr. Manav Poddar, AC to AAG-I
: Mr. Mukesh Kr. Singh, AC to GP-III
: Mr. Rakesh Kr. Singh, AC to SC (L&C)-II
: Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, AC to GA-I
: Md. Yasir Arafat, AC to GP-IV
---
08/23.01.2025 I.A. No. 3993 of 2021, I.A. No. 3998 of 2021,
I.A. No. 3999 of 2021, I.A. No. 4003 of 2021,
I.A. No. 4009 of 2021, I.A. No. 4010 of 2021,
I.A. No. 4011 of 2021, I.A. No. 4012 of 2021,
I.A. No. 4013 of 2021, I.A. No. 4014 of 2021,
I.A. No. 4015 of 2021, I.A. No. 4016 of 2021,
I.A. No. 4017 of 2021, I.A. No. 4018 of 2021,
I.A. No. 4046 of 2021, I.A. No. 4020 of 2021,
I.A. No. 4022 of 2021, I.A. No. 4023 of 2021,
I.A. No. 4026 of 2021, I.A. No. 4028 of 2021,
I.A. No. 4029 of 2021, I.A. No. 4033 of 2021,
I.A. No. 4035 of 2021, I.A. No. 4040 of 2021,
I.A. No. 4043 of 2021 & I.A. No. 4047 of 2021
1. Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties all
the aforesaid interlocutory applications seeking condonation of delay
in filing the appeals. As per the office note in each case, the delay in
filing the appeal is for a period of 1503 days.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants, by referring to the petition
for condonation of delay, has submitted that the appellants are land
losers and in spite of the award, nothing has been paid to them so as to
enable them to pay the court fees. He has referred to an order passed
in First Appeal No. 203 of 2014 dated 31.08.2018 arising out of the
same impugned award where an order was passed that the deficit court
fees will be deducted from the amount of compensation which may be
received by the appellants. It is submitted that only after coming to
know about such an order the present appellants could gather the
courage to approach this court and filed appeals in the month of
November 2018. The learned counsel submits that being satisfied with
the condition of the appellants this court has also passed similar order
dated 02.12.2020 in all these cases indicating that the deficit court fees
will be deducted from the amount of compensation which may be
received by the appellants and then the petition for condonation of
delay was filed before this court.
3. The learned counsel has submitted by referring to the petition
seeking condonation of delay that the appellants are daily wagers and
are extremely poor people and some of the land losers were even out
of their village and therefore, they could not file appeal within time
and once they came to know that the court fees can be exempted then
under such circumstances, they immediately took steps and filed
appeal before this Court. He submits that upon pointing out of defect
and after seeking exemption from payment of court fees, the petition
for condonation of delay has been filed.
4. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-
Union of India has opposed the prayer by submitting that if the date is
taken till the date of filing of the petition for condonation of delay,
then the delay would be much more and has referred to one of the
cases , that is, F.A. No. 451/2018, to submit that in this case it would
be 2481 days. The appellant(s) have not explained the delay in filing
the petition for condonation of delay.
5. The learned Senior counsel for the Union of India has also
relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 31248 of 2018 [Pathapati Subba
Reddy (Died) by L.Rs. & others Vs. The Special Deputy Collector
(LA)] decided on 08.04.2024 (paragraph 26(vi)] to submit that merely
some of the persons have obtained relief in similar matter, same does
not mean that the others are entitled to the same benefit, if the Court is
not satisfied with the cause shown for the delay in filing the appeal.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court finds
that an order dated 31.08.2018 was passed in First Appeal No. 203 of
2014 wherein it was directed that the deficit court fees will be
deducted from the amount of compensation and then only the rest of
the amount will be released, if any, to the claimants.
7. This Court finds that specific averment has been made in the
petition for condonation of delay that the appellant(s) are very poor
persons; some of them are even out of village and are daily wage
earner and they were not able to approach this Court because of
poverty. This fact has not been denied by the respondents in their
counter-affidavit.
8. This Court is of the view that the poverty by itself is a disability
and this court is of the considered view and is satisfied that the
appellants were genuinely prevented from approaching this Court in
filing First Appeal. This Court also finds that considering the
genuineness of their grievance, this Court has also passed order dated
02.12.2020 in these batch of cases in the same line as that of First
Appeal No. 203 of 2014 with regards to payment of court fees.
9. So far as the judgment which has been relied upon by the
respondents passed in the case of Pathapati Subba Reddy (Supra) is
concerned, this Court is of the view that none of the claimants have
actually obtained any relief and the matter regarding compensation is
under challenge not only in this appeal, but even Union of India has
filed an appeal arising out of the same award and further, this Court is
satisfied with the cause shown by the appellants for delay in filing the
appeal(s).
10. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances, the delay in
filing the appeal(s) is hereby condoned and all these interlocutory
applications are allowed.
First Appeal No. 451 of 2018 and analogous cases
11. Admit.
12. It has been reported that the records from the learned Arbitrator
have already been received in F.A. NO. 367 of 2018 which arises of
the same award.
13. Since all these cases arise out of the same award, these First
Appeals are directed to be tagged together.
14. Post these cases on 12th February 2025 in the supplementary
cause-list.
15. Post F.A. No. 367 of 2018 also on 12th February 2025 along
with these cases.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Pankaj
