TAPEN SEN, J. - (1.) What were the events that led the respondent No. 1 to conclude that the Petitioner was an encroacher of a public land is an issue which has to be examined in the background of the facts and circumstances of this case. The other question that falls for consideration is as to whether the petitioner unit was a part of the Royal Tisra Colliery and in order to ascertain this fihding we have to necessarily advert to the facts of this case. The facts which are necessary to be looked into are as follows and which are being stated hereinafter on the basis of pleadings made in this writ application : 1. According to the petitioners, lands measuring 9.46 acres situated at Plot Nos. 639, 641, 642, 643, 644, 646, 649, 648, 650, 653 and 695 were purchased by them, whereafter some time in the year 1971 the petitioners constructed a Hard Coke Plant and got it registered under the Small Scale Industries Scheme of the State of Bihar vide Registration No. 3291 of 1971. It was also registered under the Factories Aet. By reason of coming into force of the Coal Mines (Taking Over of Management) Ordinance, 1973 on 30-1-1973, all Coal Mines specified in the Schedule appended to the said Ordinance stood vested in the Central Government on and from 31-1-1973 and a Custodian was appointed to remain in-charge of the management of such Mines. The aforesaid Ordinance was replaced subsequently by an Act, known as the Coal Mines (Taking Over of the Management) Act, 1973which was published on 31-3-1973. Again the Central Government enacted the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 which was published on 30-5-1973 and the appointed date was given as 1-5-1973 and on and from said date, i.e 1-5-1973 the Coal Mines specified in the Schedule appended thereto, stood nationalized. The Petitioners have further stated that the Custodian illegally and wrongfully took over the Management of the Hard Coke Plant of the Petitioners, treating the same as part of Royal Tisra Colliery by his order dated 1-2-4973 as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ application.
(2.) According to the petitioherb, however, the Coke Oven Plant was not a part of Royal Tisra Colliery, and, therefore, the Custodian realising his mistake, and being satisfied that the plant, land, machinery etc. did not form part of the said Coal Mines, had hot vested, accordingly handed back the possession of the same to the Petitioners vide letter dated 28-4-1973 as contained at Annexiare-2. Thereafter, the petitioners stated that the respondent No:(3) M/s Bharat Coking Coal Limited) attempted to acquire some of the plots belonging to the Petitioners on which the Hard (Coke Plant was situated. They issued a Notification dated 16-2-1981 under the Bihar Gazette and a case being Case No. 8-B of 1979-80 under the Land Acquisition Act was initiated against Shri Mahabir Prasad Agarwala, one of the partners of the Petitioner. However, on an objection raised by him, the respondents revoked the said Notification.
(3.) According to the Petitioners, the Respondent No. 3 (Bharat Coking Coal Limited) has always attempted to grab the property under the pretext that it stood vested under the provisions of Nationalisation Act. According to them, in their pursuit to grab this property, the Respondent No. 2 (The Administrative Officer, Lodna Area of Bharat Coking Coal Limited) submitted a report on 29-8-1985 before the Respondent No. 1 (Estate Officer, Shri Ramesh Prasad) wherein they alleged that 4.52 acres of land situated at different plots in Mouza Alakdiha of the said Hard Coke Plant had vested. In the said report, according to the Petitioners, it was incorrectly mentioned that the Hard Coke Plant was constructed five years after the Nationalisation. The RespondentiNo. 2 requested the Respondent No. 1 to initiate proceedings under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971. The Petitioners have further stated that in the said encroachment report some lands which were not in the possession of the Petitioners were also included. After receiving the aforementioned report, the Respondent No. 1 proceeded under the aforementioned Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (Hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as the Act) and it was registered as the Case No. 28 of 1978. Notices were issued under Section 4(1) of the said Act. The Petitioners have stated that although aforementioned Act was not applicable, yet in good faith they filed their cause and produced their documents and also examined witnesses. In the meantime on 14/18-5-1993 the General Manager, Lodna Area of the Respondent No. 3 sent a letter to the Petitioners alleging that they were unauthorized occupants and, therefore, they should vacate the land in question, over which they were in unauthor, ized occupation, as according to the case of Bharat Coking Coal Limited, the land, admittedly became a vested property in the Central Government, namely, Bharat Coking Coal Limited under the provisions of Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act. 1973.;