IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Civil Review No. 84 of 2010
---
1. Hari Lal Sao
2. Rajesh Prasad Sao … … Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Jharkhand
2. Bhagwati Devi … … Respondents
—
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. K. MERATHIA
—
For the Petitioner : Mr. R, P, Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Ayush Aditya, Advocate
—
Order No. 4 Dated, 11th day of November 2011
As prayed, defects are ignored.
Heard Mr. R. P. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners and Mr. Ayush Aditya, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent no. 2 – Bhagwati Devi.
Mr. Gupta submitted that on 8.7.2010 when W.P.(C) No.
4511 of 2006 was disposed of, it could not be pointed out by the
petitioners that the matter was transferred by the Deputy
Commissioner, East Singhbhum to the Additional Collector and
therefore, he had jurisdiction to pass order. He further submitted that
even if it is accepted that the Additional Collector had no power to pass
the order, the matter could have been remitted to the Deputy
Commissioner and therefore, the said order may be recalled and the
matter may be remitted to the Deputy Commissioner.
On the other hand, Mr. Ayush Aditya submitted that as per
the said order, the petitioners have already filed a suit being Title Suit
No. 139 of 2010 in the court of Sub-Judge I, Jamshedpur and the
petitioners are always at liberty to raise all the points available to them
in the suit.
On this, Mr. Gupta submitted that had the petitioners been
able to point out the aforesaid position, the matter could have been
remitted either to the Deputy Commissioner or the opposite party.
Respondent no. 2 might have been asked to file suit, but in view of the
order passed by this Court, the petitioner has filed suit.
-2-
In the circumstances, it is clarified that the orders passed
by the revenue authorities and the said order dated 8.7.20120 passed
in W.P.(C) No. 4511 of 2006 will not prejudice the parties on merits in
the suit.
In my opinion, the order under review is not required to be
interfered with as ultimately the disputes between the parties are
required to be decided by the competent court of civil jurisdiction.
In the circumstances, this civil review is disposed of with
the observations as aforesaid.
(R. K. Merathia, J.)
R. Shekhar Cp 2