SUBHADRA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application the prayer of the petitioner is to quash the notice contained in Annexure-1 and the order contained in Annexure-5 issued/passed in Misc. Case No. 14/85-86 by the Anchal Adhikari, Jarmundi in the district of Santhal Parganas and also for quashing of the order dated 21-4-91 contained in Annexure 8, filed along with the amendment application. By the aforementioned order contained in Annexure-5 the Anchal Adhikari (respondent No. 2) passed the order for demolition of the structure put up by the petitioner and the order contained in Annexure 8 is for removing the encroachment allegedly made by the petitioner over the land in question.

(2.) This matter was admitted for hearing vide order dt. 22-4-86 and the interim order of status quo passed on 24-2-86 was continued during the pendency of this writ petition. Vide order dated 22-2-91 this Court on the application for amendment filed on behalf of the petitioner stayed the operation of the impugned order contained in Annexure 8.

(3.) It is contended by Mr. Jha, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the impugned orders are wholly without jurisdiction inasmuch as the respondents Nos. 2 and 3 have acted in gross violation of law in directing the petitioner to remove the alleged encroachment from the land in question, which, in fact, belongs to the petitioner. It is not claimed by the State that the land in question is a public land. However, it is contended by the learned G.P. as well as the learned Counsel appearing for respondents Nos. 3 and 4 that the impugned orders have been passed by respondents under Section 15 of the Bengal Survey Act, which vests power in the Collector to remove doubt and decide disputes as to boundary determined by Court or laid down by survey. According to the learned Counsel, the Collector has been defined under Section 2 of the said Act which means every Collector of a district and includes every officer either generally or specially vested with the powers of a Collector for the purpose of the said Act. In this connection, the learned G.P. VIII referred to the book concerning guidelines issued to Circle Officers published by Malhotra Bros. and submitted that the provisions of Santhal Parganas Tenancy Act, 1949 is applicable to the whole of Santhal Pargana Division comprising of Dumka, Sahibgunj, Godda and Deoghar Districts. The Circle Officer under the said Act also has to play an important role as specified in the other two Acts relating to lands, namely (i) Bihar Tenancy Act and (ii) Chotanagpur Tenancy Act and the Circle Officer acts as the Collector of the area as empowered and noticed by the State Government and under the Santhal Parganas Act also he has to see the works of the right of the raiyats in settlement of lands, fixation of rents, terms of rent etc. It is thus, contended by him that in the Santhal Pargana, the Circle Officer for all practical purposes acts as a Collector of the area dealing with rights of raiyats in settlement of land, fixation of rent, terms of rent etc. and as the present matter relates to the dispute about the land in Santhal Pargana, the respondent No. 2 has rightly exercised the power under the provisions of the Bengal Survey Act to decide the dispute and order for removal of the encroachment as was alleged before him by respondents Nos. 3 and 4.