BHIKHRAM BHAGAT Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 14.12.2016 (Annexure-5) passed in SAR Revision No. 01/2012 by the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi whereby and whereunder the order passed by the Additional Collector, Ranchi, in SAR Appeal No. 05R15/11-12 as well as order dated 01.02.2011 passed in SAR Case No. 55/10-11 by the Special Officer, SAR, Ranchi, have been affirmed.

(2.) The brief facts of the case of the petitioner as per the pleading made in the writ petition is that the respondent No. 4, Bisu Oraon, who is the son of granddaughter of khatiyani raiyat filed an application on 01.06.2010 before the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi for restoration of the land bearing R.S. Khata No. 53 of Plot No. 71, area 0.80 acres against the petitioner no. 1 and 2 which was registered as SAR Case No. 55/2010-11, in which, the Special Officer, SAR vide order dated 01.02.2011 has passed order of restoration in favour of respondent no. 4 but the said proceeding has been concluded without appreciating the fact that the respondent No. 4 is not the descendant of Khatiyani Raiyat Turi Oraon rather he is the son of Bagi Orain, a daughter of Bhowka Oraon, Bhanka Oraon who was the son of the khatiyani raiyat Turi Oraon and according to the customary law of Oraon Community female member has got no right on her father's property and as such, the said Bisu Oraon has got no locus standi to file a case under Section 71A of the Chota Nagapur Tenancy Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1908) but unfortunately the learned lower court of Special Officer, SAR, Ranchi has passed order of restoration in favour of such petitioner/respondent no. 4 who has no locus standi and also the Special officer, SAR, Ranchi has not given opportunity to the petitioner no. 1 and 2 and passed the order of restoration in hest on 01.02.2011.

(3.) It is the further case that the petitioner No. 3 to 6 having no knowledge about the SAR Case No. 55/2010-11 and also they have not been impleaded as party in the case before the Special Officer under SAR, Ranchi.