RAM LAL JAMUDA AND MOTAI JOJO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR
LAWS(JHAR)-2003-2-42
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on February 13,2003

Ram Lal Jamuda And Motai Jojo Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

TAPEN SEN, J. - (1.) HEARD the parties.
(2.) THE writ petitioners are aggrieved with the manner in which their dwellings were demolished by Officers belonging to the department of Forests causing loss and injury to them. The petitioners have stated that apart from destroying their habitats, these officers also took away the household articles belonging to them. They have further stated that they are poor villagers who were subjected to unforeseen miseries at the time when these officers appeared. They suffered mental harassment and torture; so much so that the respondents did not even care to first comply with an earlier order that was passed in CWJC No. 1203 of 1995(R), a copy whereof has been brought on record by Annexure 1 to the Writ Application. In the Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1, it has inter alia, been contended that the allegations of the petitioners are not true and that the allegations are vague, inasmuch as no details in relation to the Patrolling Parties have been furnished. It has further been contended that upon enquiry made by the respondent No. 2 and from the report of the Officer -in -charge, Muffasil Police Station, it transpires that, in fact, no Patrolling Party had been deputed by the Muffasil Police Station for the villages in question and, therefore, the question of carrying away articles from the residence of the petitioners does not arise. The Counter Affidavit further proceeds to deny statements made by the petitioners and goes to the extent of refuting the charge in relation to demolition of the houses of the petitioners. On an earlier occasion when this case was taken up on 10.4.1995, this Court had directed the Deputy Commissioner to personally enquire into the matter and submit report to this Court with reference to the allegations made in the writ petition. Pursuant to the aforementioned order, the Deputy Commissioner, Singhbhum (West), Chaibasa has submitted a report. When this case was taken up on 14.11.2002, it was, however, noticed that the Department of Forests had not been made party in this case. Consequently the learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to implead the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Government of Jharkhand as respondent No. 5 and Lalan Singh, Range Officer of Forests as respondent No. 6. Thereafter a Counter affidavit has been filed in CWJC No. 689 of 1994(R) and Mr. R.S. Majumdar, learned Government Advocate has submitted that this Counter Affidavit may also be treated as Counter affidavit in the other case i.e. CWJC No. 542 of 1994(R). From a perusal of the report of the Deputy Commissioner, Singhbhum West, it appears that the demolition took place on 27.2.1994. The Counter Affidavit filed on behalf of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Government of Jharkhand discloses that the petitioners were encroachers on reserved forest lands by clearing vegetations over it and settling down on forest lands after constructing houses thereon. It has further been stated in the Counter Affidavit that a criminal forest case has been instituted vide Offence Report dated 13.4.1994 which is subjudice in the Court of the Magistrate at Chaibasa and that a proceeding under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act has also been instituted against the petitioner No. 1 of CWJC No. 689 of 1994(R) (Ram Lal Jamuda) for his eviction. In support of the aforesaid contention, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests has annexed An - nexures A and B which show that they were all initiated on 13.4.1994, i.e. after the date of demolition, which the Deputy Commissioners report reveals to be 27.2.1994.
(3.) MR . R.S. Majumdar, learned Government Advocate further submits that on 3.5.2002 a letter has been sent from the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India in relation to eviction of illegal encroachment on forest lands in various States. He relies on Annexure E and states that even the Supreme Court is greatly concerned with the problem of encroachment of forest lands and have restrained the Central Government, by order dated 23.11.2001 from regularization of encroachments in the country in W.P. 202 of 1995.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.