Fulo Devi vs State of Jharkhand And Ors

Heard Mr. Swapan Maji, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned A.C. to S.C. (L&C)-I appearing for the respondent-State.

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for direction to the respondents to settle and complete the process of settlement of land and demarcate the land measuring an area of 25 decimals of Khata No. 86, Khesra No. 600, Mouza Todar, Serenghatu, P.S. Senha, District- Lohardaga in favour of the petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that being a landless labourer of the status of below the poverty line, the petitioner was settled with an area of 25 decimals of land of Khesra No. 600 of Khata No. 86, Mouza Todar, Serenghatu, P.S. & Circle Senha, District- Lohardaga after verification, inspection and recommendation of the appropriate authorities and finally sanctioned by the Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga vide order dated 25.05.1995 in Land Settlement Case No. 6 of 1992-93, which is annexed at Annexure-1 to this writ petition. He further submits that after the settlement of the land, the Revenue Officer, Lohardaga has passed order of mutation on 25.05.1995, whereby, rent is assessed. The petitioner is paying rent to the Government against the above settlement of land in favour of the petitioner. After the said settlement, the petitioner came in possession of certain portion of land by using the same as Bari. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that all of a sudden at the instance of certain interested persons of the village, the revenue department refused to accept rent. The petitioner filed an application before the authorities and Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Lohardaga vide letter dated 28.06.2004 instructed the Circle Officer, Senha to look into the matter. He further submits that only due to interference of few villagers, the petitioner's rent receipt has been stopped. He also submits that the Additional Collector, Lohardaga passed the order dated 22.10.2013 allowing the Settlement Appeal No. 1 of 2012-13 with direction to process the settlement in favour of the petitioner, which is contained in Annexure-11 to this writ petition. He further submits that in spite of the order passed by the Additional Collector, Lohardaga, the authorities concerned have not demarcated the land in question. The petitioner has also deposited the cost of demarcation before the competent authority, which is annexed at Annexure-12 to this writ petition. He further submits that the petitioner has approached the Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga by way of Annexure-15 and requested him to direct the concerned authority to demarcate the land in question as the cost of demarcation has already been deposited. He further submits that the decision has not yet been taken by the Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga upon Annexure-15.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State submits that the petitioner has not cooperated for demarcation of the land when the officer concerned has reached to the spot.

In view of the above facts and submission of the learned counsel for the parties, the Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga is directed to take a decision upon Annexure-15 and pass an appropriate order, keeping in mind Annexure- 1 of this writ petition, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall cooperate with the authority concerned for demarcation of the land, in question, if such request is extended to the petitioner.