- (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing the judgment dated 07/12/2010, passed by the learned District Judge, Bokaro in Misc. Appeal No. 11 of 2010 (Annexure5) affirming the order dated 25/02/2010, passed by the Estate Officer, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro in Case No. A/E 776 of 2009.
(2.) IT is submitted by Mr. Sahani that a general notice was published in the newspapers under Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 and, then a cryptic order was passed by the Estate Officer on 25/02/2010, directing eviction, against which, appeal was filed but the same was also dismissed without considering the case of the petitioner. He further submitted that the learned District Judge observed that the order of the Estate Officer is not appealable and the appeal was time barred also. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has filed this writ petition in representative capacity claiming to be the Secretary, Jharkhand Rajya Rajak Kalyan Samittee; and that some of the occupants appeared before the Estate Officer; and that the parties were heard on 17/02/2010 and the case was fixed for order on 25/02/2010; and that the unauthorized occupants could not produce anything in support of their right to stay on the lands in question and, therefore, the Estate Officer rightly passed the order for eviction; and that an appeal was filed against the said order, raising all the points; and that the learned District Judge, after considering the respective cases of the parties and the materials brought on record by them, dismissed the appeal interalia holding that the lands in question, belong to respondent Company and without their permission several constructions cropped up by encroaching the area and the respondent Company in its planing to develop the area needed the same and filed this case for eviction; and that the service of notice was effected through different modes as exercised under the law; and that some of the persons appeared and that they could not prove their permissive possession; and that they were unauthorized occupants by making construction of Jhuggi, Jhopri, semi permanent and permanent houses. He further submitted that while dismissing the appeal on merits, the learned District Judge simply observed that the order was not appealable as it was passed under Section 5 A of the Act and the appeal was time barred but even if such observations are kept aside, it will appear that the appeal was heard and disposed of on merits. I find force in the submissions of the learned counsel for the respondents. Notice was served on the occupants through paper publication. Some of them appeared also. The basis of right to occupy could not be shown as yet. The Estate Officer heard the parties. Even if his order was short, appeal was filed against that order. The appeal was decided on merits. Even if the observation that the order under appeal was not appealable and it was time barred, is ignored, no grounds are made out for interference with the impugned order. The unauthorized occupants are directed to vacate the lands in question within four weeks from today. In the result, this writ petition is dismissed.;