(1.) Heard Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Deepankar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-State and Mr. P.A.S. Pati, learned counsel appearing for the respondents- Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. (in short TISCO).
(2.) Prayer in this petition is made for a direction upon the respondent No. 4 to send all the documents appertaining to the land in question. Prayer is also made for restoring the status quo of the demolished building. Further prayer is made for direction upon the respondents to pay compensation along with heavy cost to the petitioner.
(3.) Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner along with his mother Smt. Shiv Kumari Devi had purchased the homestead land measuring an area of 77.5' ft x 24.5 feet =18987.5 sqft and in side measurement North side 75' ft, South side 80' ft, East side 240' ft, West side 250' ft with asbestos roofted three rooms thereof having built up area 350 sqft situated under Mouza Sakchi, P.S. Sakchi, Thana 1153 under R.S. Khat No. 51 old Rs. Plot No. 1921 (portion) corresponding to present survey settlement finally published in the year 1995-96 recorded under New Khata No. 69, New Plot No. 664, Area 17.90 metric hectare, within Jamshedpur notified area, Ward No. 7, which was registered before the District Sub-Registrar Office, Jamshedpur, on payment of consideration amount through power of attorney holder namely Sri Shiv Charan Prasad and Sri Ram Chandra Prasad. He submits that the said sale deed was executed before the District Sub-Registrar, Jamshedpur on 21/7/2009. He further submits that the dispute was prevailing between the TISCO and Sri Shiv Charan Prasad and others. He further submits that for that a title suit was also instituted, in which, the TISCO has lost the said suit and pursuant to that the TISCO has moved before the High Court in the second appeal, being Second Appeal No. 197 of 2009, which was also dismissed by the co-ordinate bench vide order dtd. 30/8/2018. He further submits that against the said dismissal, the TISCO has moved before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP Civil Diary No. 15661 of 2019. He submits that in the said SLP by way of order dtd. 10/5/2019, the notice was issued and direction was passed to maintain the status quo, however, on 1/9/2020, the respondent No. 4 came on the site along with the police force as well as the JCB machines and bulldozed the three rooms and boundary wall of the petitioner, in absence of any proceeding initiated under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act and in absence of any notice. He submits that in the counter affidavit of the TISCO as well as the respondents-State has also accepted the said fact, however, a plea has been taken that for maintaining the status quo order, the SDO has acted upon, as such, the action of the SDO is arbitrary in absence of any proceeding, as such, the petitioner is entitled for the prayer made in the instant writ petition.