IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
C.W.J.C. No. 2533 of 1999 (R)
1) Mangra Pahan @ Bhola Pahan
2) Budhram Pahan ... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar,
Through the Deputy Commissioner,
Ranchi & Ors. ... ... Respondents
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR SINHA
For the Petitioners: Mr. B.V.Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Ram Prakash Singh,
J.C. to G.P.-II.
--------
12/ 12.02.2009
. The present writ petition has been preferred for issuance of
a writ of or in the nature of Certiorari for quashing of the order
dated 22.9.1998 passed by the respondent No. 2 in Lohardaga
Revenue Revision No. 350 of 1996 (Annexure-7) whereby he has
illegally set aside the order dated 25.6.1996 (Annexure-6) in SAR.
Appeal No. 8 R 15 of 1995-96 passed by the respondent No. 3.
The impugned order has rightly recorded the fact that the
owner died issueless and both the parties are claiming the land in
question on the basis of being the recorded tenant agnates and
thus there was no transfer of the land in contravention of Section
46 of the Chhota Nagpur Tenancy Act or for that matter any other
provision including 71A.
The counsel for the petitioner submits that even forcible
dispossession amounts to transfer. However, here the issue is as to
whether such transfer was from tribal to non-tribal. The Revisional
Court has also recorded the fact that the L.R.D.C., Lohardagga,
after considering the decision given by the competent Civil Court
rightly dismissed the SAR. Case Nos. 68/94-95, 69/94-95 70/94-95
by a common order.
The Additional Collector, Lohardagga, who allowed the
appeal unfortunately, ignored the dismissal of title suit No. 16/85
passed by the Competent Court and that is how Revision was
allowed, which is sought to be challenged in this writ petition.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstance of the
case, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter.
This writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
D.S. (Ajit Kumar Sinha, J.)