Renu Singh vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 15.10.2011 passed by the Land Reforms, Deputy Collector Sadar, Ranchi in Misc. Case No.67 of 2010-11 as contained under Annexure-9 whereby and whereunder the proceeding was dismissed ex-parte and further the matter was sent to Lok Adalat.

It is evident from the factual matrix as brought out by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the present writ petition, while the proceeding has already been disposed of by the Deputy Collector, Ranchi by way back on 15.10.2011. The petitioner has filed a writ petition being W.P.(C). No. 6049 of 2011, which has been disposed of vide order dated 12.04.2017 wherein the averment has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, by which the entire pleading of the aforesaid writ petition based on i.e. the Misc. Case No.67 of 2010-11 is pending, and on that pretext a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, while disposing of the writ petition dated 12.04.2017, has directed the petitioner to pursue the case before the respondent No.3- Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Sadar, Ranchi by taking of the plea therein for its consideration.

The petitioner thereafter, has filed Civil Review, for review of the order dated 12.04.2017 passed in W.P.(C). No.6049 of 2011 being Civil Review No.46 of 2017 for review of the aforesaid, on the ground that the fact about pendency of the Misc. Case No.67 of 2010-11 has wrongly been stated in the aforesaid writ petition while actually the aforesaid proceeding was already disposed of way back on 15.10.2011. This Court, while disposing of the aforesaid Civil Review vide order dated 15.01.2019, has passed order by making observation therein that the petitioner may challenge the order passed in Misc. Case No.67 of 2010-11, before the appropriate forum, if permissible under the law.

The petitioner again invoked the jurisdiction of this Court conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, according to the petitioner the High Court is the appropriate forum.

Learned counsel appearing for the State-respondent, has submitted to such submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the appropriate forum is the High Court and therefore, the present writ petition has been filed, is not at all correct for the reason that the matter pertains to receipt of rent and the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Sadar, Ranchi being the revenue authority, has passed the order, therefore, the said order is assailable under the appellate as well as revisional jurisdiction as per the provision of Bihar Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973 under the provision of Section 15 or 16, therefore, in view of the availability of alternative remedy of appeal, the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be said to be appropriate forum.

This Court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the order passed by the writ court in W.P.(C). No.6049 of 2011 as also the order passed in Civil Review No. 46 of 2017 dated 15.01.2019, is of the view that this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order dated 15.10.2011 passed in Misc. Case No.67 of 2010-11, wherein liberty to approach to the appropriate forum has been accorded but again approaching this Court is not proper otherwise it will amount to review of the order passed on 15. 01.2019 passed in Civil Review No.46 of 2017.

In view of thereof, there is no merit in the writ petition accordingly fails and is dismissed.