- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. The present Public Interest Litigation has been filed projecting that a private Company-respondent no.8 has encroached upon more than 200 acres of Government land. Looking to the peculiar situation of the State of Jharkhand where the poor public are of the castes of Tribes and also of the Schedule Caste and there is more poverty and apprehending encroachment of the Government land, notice was issued to the respondent no.8-Company.
(2.) THE State has submitted a detailed reply and annexed a chart indicating the measurement of the land. The State has submitted that there are three categories of the land in the State of Jharkhand: one is Gairmazrua land, the land settled to different Raiyats and the third category is the land belonging to the Government and the Government's department. The Gairmazrua land can be given by the Government to any body including any industrial entrepreneurs So far as the land settled to the Raiyats are concerned, the Raiyats get right to cultivate but cannot transfer the land. Therefore, if any land has been purchased from the Raiyats without the consent of the Government that sale may entail cancellation the Raiyat's right and vesting the land in the Government. So far as other Government lands belonging to the Government's department are concerned, the Government owns the land but it is possessed by the Government department. It is submitted that respondent no.8-Company entered into one MOU on 14th August, 2008 whereby the Company proposed to set up integrated Steel Plant with enhanced capacity of 2.5 M.T. per year of steel products in the State of Jharkhand with proposed investment of Rs.9120 crores in the manner prescribed in the MOU. As per Clause 4.1 the Government of Jharkhand has agreed to assist the respondent no.8-Company in obtaining the land required for manufacturing and other related activities to complete the project. As per the Clause, the respondent no.8-Company was made responsible for even settlement and rehabilitation of affected families in terms of the extent resettlement and rehabilitation policy of the State Government. The other Clauses are not very much relevant for our purpose. As per the facts of the case it appears that the Government allotted 53.58 acres of land in favour of respondent no.8 on 20.02.2010. However, it has been alleged that respondent no.8-Company has encroached upon more land which may be more than 200 acres of land. According to the learned counsel for the State, the State came to know about the encroachment made by respondent no.8-Company upon which a proceeding was initiated against it under the provisions of the Public Premises(Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 wherein eviction order has already been passed by the competent authority. However, against the order of the State authority the respondent no.8-Company has preferred appeal wherein interim order has been passed in favour of the respondent no.8-Company. It is also submitted that the State Government is proceeding to take action in view of the illegal sale of the land by the Raiyats to the respondent no.8. It is also submitted that there is Gochar land for which land it will be allotted to the respondent no.8-Company only by following the procedure of the law and by ear-marking another Gochar land for the villagers. It is also submitted that for that consent has been obtained from the villagers.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that State has given wrong facts to the Court. It is also submitted that instead of taking action against respondent no.8 for purchasing the lands from Raiyats the action is being taken against the Raiyats so as to take away Raiyats by the Government. It is also submitted that no consent was given by the villagers for shifting of the Gochar land and transfer of the Gochar land to the respondent no.8. It is also submitted that the Government started taking action against respondent no.8- Company only when this Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the writ petitioner. This writ petition was entertained in view of the fact that there is allegation that more than 200 acres of land of the Government has been encroached by the respondent no.8- Company which is a private Company for which the Government has not taken any action. We have, therefore, mentioned the facts in detail. Since respondent no.8 is proceeding according to the agreement entered into between the State Government and the respondent no.8, it may proceed and the Respondent no.8 may proceed to complete the project. However, so far this project does not give any liberty or licence to the respondent no.8 to encroach upon the Government land. However, State Government has already initiated proceeding against respondent no.8 for unauthorisedly occupying the Government's Land and wherein eviction order has been passed. So far as the transfer of land of the Raiyats is concerned, the action can be taken only in accordance with law and that may by cancellation of the Raiyat rights and resuming the land by the State Government and in that situation the land can be transferred to only those persons who are eligible to get the land under the land laws of the State of Jharkhand and if the land laws will not permit, the respondent no.8 may not get the land. So far as Gochar land is concerned, for that yet no decision has been taken by the Government and it has been stated that certain amount has been deposited for the Gochar land, some other land is ear-marked. The Government is expected to take into confidence the villagers and thereafter, may proceed in accordance with law for this land. In totality of the facts it appears that respondent no.8 was given land by the State Government under a lawful contract upon which respondent no.8 started construction on the land for establishing industrial unit, for that there cannot be any objection. But, so far as other issues are concerned, we are making it clear to the State Government that State Government shall follow the law and thereafter, may proceed in the matter and if, the case is made out for recovery of the damages for use and occupation of the Government land by the respondent no.8, the said amount can also be recovered by the State Government but, by following the due process of law. In view of the above reasons and with above observations, this writ petition is disposed of.;