M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) THIS appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.8.1997, passed in CWJC No. 1771 of 1996 (R), whereby the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking direction upon the respondents to pay compensation for the land alleged to have been acquired by the Forest Department for the purpose of declaring it as private forest.
(2.) PETITIONERS case inter alia is that the land in question of Mouza Chalio was the ancestral jagir property of Loknath Sahi and others whose names were recorded as owner of Jungles. Petitioner alongwith others were resident of the adjoining village alleged to have taken settlement of the jungle lands inside the jungle for the purpose of reclamation. Petitioner alongwith others filed Title Suit No. 44/1929 against the owner of the land for declaration that the settlement of the disputed land with the plaintiff inside the jungle of Mouza Chalio are valid and they are entitled to exercise the act of possession over the same by entering into the jungle and the defendants have no right to interfere with their possession. A copy of the judgment of Title Suit No, 44/1929 has been annexed as Annexure -4 to the writ petition. On the basis of decree passed in the said suit, petitioner claims that when the said jungle (forest) was declared as private forest, he is entitled to compensation. Petitioner earlier moved this Court filing CWJC No. 696/94R for the same relief. This Court disposed of the writ petition on 28.11.95, holding that petitioner has come after such a long time, this Court cannot grant any relief to the petitioner. It was observed that petitioner if so advised may approach the Deputy Commissioner who will look into the matter and pass order. The Deputy Commissioner considered the representation of the petitioner and found that the jungle was never owned and possessed by the petitioner and in the title suit petitioner obtained a decree where State of Bihar or any of the department was not made party. Further the jungle was declared as private, forest much after the aforementioned decree obtained by the petitioner. From perusal of the judgment passed in the aforesaid suit which is sheet anchor of the case of the petitioner. It appears that it was simply a suit claiming some right to use the forest land and nothing else. The State of Bihar never recognized the petitioner at any point of time as raiyat or occupier of the jungle. Prima facie, I do not find any material to hold that the petitioner was rightful owner of the forest land. In my opinion, therefore, learned single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition holding that such disputed question of title in respect of the land on the basis of decree obtained long long back, cannot be decided by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction.
(3.) FOR the reasons aforesaid, there is no merit in this appeal, which is accordingly dismissed.;