KAMAL KISHORE Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been preferred for quashing the notice dated 3.6.2005 issued by the respondent no. 3 whereunder the petitioners have been directed to vacate the portion of plots which they are occupying, failing which they will be evicted by force. Petitioners have also prayed for quashing of notice published in the paper dated 21.6.2006 whereby the petitioners have been directed to remove their construction and for issuance of further direction to the respondents not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner.

(2.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that these petitioners are resident of PWD Colony, Adarsh Nagar, Sakchi, Jamshedpur since more than 40 years and the said area is huge area having vast tract of land which was vacant. It is further submitted that the case of the petitioners is that they have been residing by constructing temporary structures, which were constructed by their ancestors more than 40 to 45 years back. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that there are 54 families residing in the same area and petitioners have been given voter identity cards issued by the Election Commission of India in which house number has also been indicated. It is further stated that petitioners have been allotted Ration Card showing them to be the residents of the said Peon Colony. Petitioners have been suddenly informed by the notice dated 3.6.2005 that they should remove their structures over the land in question otherwise they will be forcefully evicted. It is further stated that suddenly a paper notification was issued on 21.6.2006 informing the petitioners to remove their structures from Khata No. 242 Plot No. 1030 i.e. Peon Colony. Thereafter, on 26.6.2006 steps were taken by the district administration for removing and demolishing the entire colony, but due to public protest they could not succeed.

(3.) During the course of argument learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to show any documents which establish their claim that petitioners have been residing in the area since last 40 years. The Voter Identity Cards furnished by them is of the year 1995 and different periods including 2003 and 2004. On the other hand, they have also stated that Ration Cards were issued to them (Annexure-2 series containing the photocopies of the Ration Cards). It appears that the Ration Cards have been issued sometime in the years 1991, 1997, 2001 and 2003 and as such, period obviously does not relate to 40 years as claimed by the petitioners. However, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that no proceeding under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act (now adopted by the State of Jharkhand) has been initiated against the petitioners before issuance of the impugned notice and for removal of the encroachment.