GOPAL GORAIN Vs. BIMALA BALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed this writ application praying that the orders incorporated in Annexures 2 and 3, dated the 12th December, 1968 and 14th May, 1969 respectively, may be quashed. The first order had been passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dumka, on appeal, and the last order was passed by the Commissioner of Bhagalpur Division.

(2.) The relevant facts of the case are as follows: One Asuri Bala, daughter of Raju Bala, had filed an application, stating that the Opposite Parties had encroached upon her land in Jamabandi No. 37, recorded in the name of Raju, and praying that the opposite parties may be evicted from the said land. In his order, the Additional Deputy Commissioner came to the conclusion, that, Asuri Bala was entitled to an order for evic- tion of the opposite parties of the original Court and held that if the respondents before the Additional Deputy Commissioner challenged the right, title and interest of Asuri Bala, they must seek remedy in an appropriate proceeding in the Civil Court. Asuri Bala's appeal was allowed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner. The Commissioner has held, that, Asuri Bala's mother was the recorded raiyat in respect of the disputed land, and, on the death of the mother, namely, Raju Bala, the daughter had come into possession. In such circumstances, the Commissioner of the Division also stated, that if the appellants before him wished to establish their claim as rightful heirs entitled to the property, the proper course to be adopted by them was to go to Civil Court. Thus, the appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner of the Division.

(3.) Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, we are of opinion, that, this is not a fit case for interference in our writ jurisdiction. Apparently, the question of encroachment was accepted by two of the authorities, namely, the Additional Deputy Commissioner and the Commissioner of the Division, and, on that footing, they had granted restoration of the disputed land. On the facts found, it will not be proper, at this stage, to allow the writ petitioners to agitate disputed questions of title and, therefore, the writ application must fail. We, therefore, dismiss the writ application, but without costs.