KAMESHWAR NARAYAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the instant writ petition the petitioners pray for issuance of an appropriate writ, rule, order or direction for quashing the order dated 26.8.2003 passed by the Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh in Land Restoration Revision Case No.117 of 2001 under the provision of Section -46(4 A) of the C.N.T. Act contained in annexure -9 to the writ application by which the respondent No.2 has allowed the revision filed by the respondent Nos.5 to 12 and set aside the order dated 3.10.2001 passed by the Additional Collector, Hazaribagh in Restoration Appeal No.117 of 2001 dismissing the appeal filed by the respondent Nos.5 to 12 and order has been passed for restoration of 7.99 acres of land out of plot Nos.133, 153, 355, 652, 965, 966, 1272, 1273, 1274, 1276, 1277, 1278, 1279, 1282, 1819 and 60 of Khata No.76 situated at village Pali, P.S. Patratu, district -Hazaribagh and for such other relief or reliefs to which the petitioners are legally entitled to.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are stated as under: -

(3.) The main contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Amar Kumar Sinha is that the revisional authority i.e. the Commissioner has committed error apparent of facts and law. The first ground raised is that the third restoration case preferred by the sons was barred by resjudicata and the reasoning of the Commissioner that since the same has been preferred by the sons, the parties are different does not stand to reason. The second issue raised is that the application for restoration is barred by limitation as contemplated under Section 46 (4A) of the Act.