- (1.) In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 29/03/2000 (Annexure 3), passed by the Special Officer, Ranchi, the appellate order dated 03/09/2001 (Annexure 4), passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi and the revisional order dated 14/03/2002 (Annexure 5), passed by the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi, whereby, the application filed by respondent Nos. 6 to 8 under Section 71 A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act for restoration of the lands, was allowed.
(2.) The facts, in short, are that the lands of Khata No. 85 measuring 8.29 acres was recorded in the names of Tona Oraon, Cherga Oraon, Letho Oraon and Jhuba Oraon. Tona Oraon and Letho Oraon died issueless. Cherga Oraon had one daughter Nagia Orain, who was married to one Jata Oraon. The said Jata Oraon was taken in as 'Ghar Damad' by Cherga Oraon. According to the petitioner, as per Oraon customary law Jata Oraon became the legal heir and successor of Cherga Oraon. The petitioner is the son of Jata Oraon through Nagia Orain and, therefore, he has claimed to be the legal heir of Cherga Oraon. Jhuba Oraon died leaving behind two sons namely, Gandura Oraon and Suka Oraon. Suka Oraon died issueless and Gandura Oraon had three sons namely, Manga Oraon, Jhuba Oraon and Ghuran Oraon, i.e. respondent Nos. 6 to 8. Manga Oraon, i.e. respondent No. 6 herein, is the grand son of Jhuba Oraon. According to the petitioner, the respondent No. 6 Manga Oraon filed an application for restoration under Section 71 A of Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act against the petitioner, praying for restoration of lands under the proceeding. The said case was registered as S.A.R. Case No. 427/1978 in the Court of Special Officer, Ranchi. Further according to the petitioner, on being noticed, he appeared and filed written statements stating interalia that his father was the 'Ghar Damad' of Cherga Oraon and, therefore, he is also the legal heir and successor of the recorded tenant. He possessed the lands under proceeding and the same was also mutated in his name. He was also paying rent. The Special Officer, by his order dated 19/01/1982, rejected the application for restoration filed by respondent No. 6 holding that the petitioner was also a legal heir of the recorded tenant Cherga Oraon. The aforesaid order dated 19/01/1982 has been annexed as Annexure 1 to the writ application. It is stated that the said order became final since it was never challenged before any other higher court. Further case of the petitioner is that subsequently, respondent No. 6 Manga Oraon filed an application for cancellation of Jamabandi standing in the name of the petitioner in respect of 53 decimals of lands out of 8.29 acres of lands under Khata No. 85. The petitioner appeared and contested the case and after hearing the parties, the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Sadar, Ranchi by his order dated 24/06/1999 (Annexure 2) rejected the application for cancellation of Jamabandi on the ground that the dispute related to title, which can be decided only by the Civil Court. Thereafter, respondent Nos. 6 to 8 filed an application under Section 71 A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act, praying for restoration of various plots of Khata No. 85 against the petitioner contending that the respondent Nos. 6 to 8 were the heirs of the recorded tenant and the petitioner is the son of Nagia Orain, i.e. daughter of Cherga Oraon and, therefore, he being the son of the daughter of Cherga Oraon, cannot be a legal heir of Cherga Oraon. The said case was registered as S.A.R. Case No. 12/9798. The petitioner contested the case filed against him and stated that he was the legal heir of Cherga Oraon, who adopted his father as 'Ghar Damad' and since this dispute/issue was already adjudicated upon and decided earlier in S.A.R. Case No. 427 of 1978, in favour of the petitioner by order dated 19/01/1982 (Annexure 1), which became final and, therefore, the second application filed for restoration of the lands in question by the respondents was barred by resjudicata.
(3.) The Special Officer, by order dated 29/09/1999, rejected the restoration application on the ground that the same was barred by resjudicata. This order of the Special Officer was challenged by the respondents in appeal. The appellate court set aside the order passed by the Special Officer and remanded the matter back to the Special Officer for fresh decision. After remand, the Special Officer by order dated 29/03/2000 (Annexure 3) allowed the restoration application in favour respondent Nos. 6 to 8 holding that the petitioner being the son of the daughter of Cherga Oraon was not his legal heir.;