DHARMENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present review petition has been filed for reviewing the order dtd. 23/9/2021 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 2232 of 2021 whereby, according to the petitioner, the said writ petition was disposed of without hearing him directing the Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa (the respondent no. 2 of the said writ petition) to take appropriate informed decision in accordance with law.

(2.) Mr. Manoj Tandon, learned counsel for the review petitioner, primarily submits that the respondent no. 5- Vijay Kumar Tiwari [the petitioner of W.P.(C) No. 2232 of 2021] alleged in the said writ petition that one Renu Devi (wife of the review petitioner) and the review petitioner on the strength of fictitious sale deed, were able to get mutation of the land in question in their favour. Therefore, the respondent no. 5 was under legal obligation to array them as respondents in the said writ petition. Non- impleadment of the review petitioner and his wife as respondents in the said writ petition has directly affected their lawful right over the land in question. The respondent no. 5 is also harassing them on the pretext of the said order.

(3.) To appreciate the said submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, it would be appropriate to refer the order dtd. 23/9/2021 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 2232 of 2021, which reads as under: