Arjun Saw And Ors vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India whereby and whereunder the order dated 12.01.2016 passed by the Commissioner, Sought Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi in S.A.R. Revision No.05/2015 by which the order passed by the appellate authority in S.A.R. Appeal No.67(R)15/2014-15 has been refused to be interfered with and thereby, the order passed by the Special Officer, Scheduled Area Regulation has finally been reversed.

It is the case of the petitioners that they are in possession of the land since last 50 years having made substantial construction and in course thereof when the petitioners were residing in the said house constructed over there, an application was filed by the private respondent sometime in the year 2013, in pursuance thereto, S.A.R. Case No.129/2012-13 has been registered in which the petitioners have been noticed, in pursuance thereto they have put their appearance.

The Special Officer, Scheduled Area Regulation after coming to the conclusion on the basis of the deposition made by the applicant to the fact that the petitioners are residing over the said land since last 50 years therefore, has passed order in pursuance to second proviso to Section 71-A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 by directing the petitioners to compensate the private respondent by making payment of Rs.60,000/- per decimal as final compensation in lieu of the restoration of the land.

The private respondent has assailed the said order before the appellate authority being S.A.R. Appeal No.67(R)15/2014-15 but the appellate authority has reversed the findings of the Special Officer, Scheduled Area Regulation on the ground that no evidence has been produced by the petitioners with respect to having substantial construction made over the land in question prior to coming effect of Scheduled Area Regulation Act, 1969, therefore, the same is fraud upon the Court.

The said order has been assailed by the petitioners before the revisional authority in pursuance to the provision of Section 217 of the Chhotanahpur Tenancy Act, 1908 but the revisional authority has also refused to interfere with the order passed by the appellate authority.

Both the orders i.e., passed by the appellate authority as well as revisional authority have been assailed in this writ petition.

It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the appellate or the revisional authority has not appreciated the admission made on the part of the private respondent in the deposition made by him before the Special Officer, Scheduled Area Regulation in S.A.R. Case No.129/2012-13 rather gone into the question of production of substantial evidence of making substantial construction over the land in question and as such, according to the petitioners when there is admission on the part of the applicant who has made an application for restoration of the land, there is no need to come out with any documentary evidence on the ground of settled position of law that the production of document can only be produced if there is any rebuttal to the condition made by the other side, herein since in the deposition it has been admitted that the petitioners are in occupation of the said land by making substantial construction since last 50 years, therefore, there is no need to prove that fact.

Mr. J.F. Toppo, learned counsel for the State of Jharkhand has submitted that there is no infirmity in the order passed by the appellate or the revisional authority since the petitioners have failed to produce any relevant documents to substantiate about the substantial construction made over the land in question justifying the applicability of second proviso to Section 71-A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908.

This Court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the submission made on behalf of the petitioners to the effect that there is admission on the part of the private respondent with respect to existence of construction since last 50 years and if 50 years would be counted from the years 2013 it will come before coming into effect of Scheduled Area Regulation Act, 1969.

In view thereof, matter requires consideration, therefore, let notice be issued upon the respondent No.4 under registered as well as ordinary process, requisites for which to be filed within a week.

List this case on 21.08.2019 under the appropriate heading.