KAMLA GANGOLI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties in this review application.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners would explain that vide order dated 09.09.2009, certain observations and directions were made while disposing of the writ application, directing the respondent authorities to consider the petitioners' claim for mutation of their names in the revenue record i.e. Register-II in respect of the land under reference. However, contrary to the facts which were argued before this court, the recordings in the impugned order would suggest that the Deputy Commissioner has finally assessed the area of 2620 Sq. Mtrs of surplus land, which is not factually correct and the same is an error of record. Learned counsel explains that fact is that the assessment made by the Deputy Commissioner was only a provisional assessment and it was subject to a final decision after considering the objections of the petitioners. Since the final decision has not yet been recorded by the Deputy Commissioner, the preliminary assessment cannot be treated as a final order.

(3.) Counsel for the respondents acknowledges that the assessment made by the Deputy Commissioner was only a preliminary assessment and not a final assessment and to this extent, reference to the Deputy Commissioner's assessment as a final assessment as appearing in paras-3 and 4 of the order dated 09.09.2009, needs to be amended.