RAJESHWARI DEVI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for both the sides and perused the impugned judgment and other relevant records.

(2.) Briefly stated, the appellants-writ petitioners (hereinafter to be referred as "petitioners") are the descendants of the original applicant who was the ex landlord. By a Hukumnama dated 22.08.1951, the ex landlord settled the land comprised in Plot No. 608 of Khata No. 1, measuring about 42 decimals in village Haradih, P.S.Tamar, District Ranchi in favour of one Sukhu Mahto. The respondent nos. 4 to 7 in the writ proceeding are the legal heirs and successors of late Sukhu Mahto. In the year 1986, an application under Sec. 71A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 was filed by the ancestor of the petitioners for restoration of the aforesaid land on the ground that the Hukumnama dated 22.08.1951 was executed in contravention of Sec. 46 of the CNT Act as, no prior permission of the Deputy Commissioner was taken before the transfer of the aforesaid land to the said Sukhu Mahto. The application under Section 71A of the CNT Act was allowed in favour of the ancestor of the petitioners on 24.09.1986, against which the respondent nos. 4 to 7 preferred appeal however, the appeal was dismissed vide order dated 25.08.1987. The matter was taken in Revision vide SAR Revision No. 288 of 1987 which was dismissed vide order dated 20.10.1987, which order was challenged by filing C.W.J.C. Nos. 1941 and 1942 of 1987(R) and C.W.J.C. Nos. 213 and 162 of 1988(R). The writ petitions were allowed on 08.07.1997 and the matter was remitted back before the Revisional Authority. On remand the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division allowed SAR Revision No. 288 of 1987 vide order dated 20.04.1999. The said order was challenged by the petitioners before the Writ Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1469 of 1999(R). The writ petition was dismissed on 01.08.2006, aggrieved thereof, the petitioners are before us.

(3.) The issue contested by the parties in the present proceeding are, "whether prohibition under Sec. 46 of the CNT Act is attracted on "Zirat" land and whether provision under Sec. 71A of the CNT Act can be invoked for restoration of "Zirat" land -