- (1.) THE petitioner by way of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing and setting aside the order dated 12.01.2004 (Annexure -4), passed by the Respondent No. 2, the learned Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi in S.A.R. Revision No. 02 of 2004, whereby the Revision application filed by the present petitioner has been rejected.
(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent -State Government and the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 7. Perused the impugned order as well as other materials placed on record.
(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner while referring the impugned order dated 12.01.2004, passed by the learned Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi, submitted that the learned Commissioner has passed this order without assigning any reason whatsoever and disposed of the revision application by passing a mere four line order. It is further submitted that the petitioner in his revision application has raised various grounds but none of the grounds raised by the petitioner has been considered and reasons thereof has been given by the revisional authority while rejecting the revision application filed by the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that earlier S.A.R. application was submitted by the respondent no. 7 vide S.A.R. Case No. 16 of 1986 and against the said order, the respondent no. 7 has never preferred any appeal. Therefore, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the said order has attained finality. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the issue involved in the matter is squarely covered by the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble apex Court in the case of (i) Jai Mangal Oraon -versus -Mira Nayak (Smt) and others reported in (2000) 5 SCC 141 and (ii) in the case of Situ Sahu and others -versus - State of Jharkhand & others reported in 2004 (8) SCC 340 (SC). It is lastly submitted that considering the ratio decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above referred two judgments, this Court has also delivered judgment in the case of in the case of Shyam Narayan Singh & Anr. -versus -The Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi & Ors. reported in 2013 (1) J.C.R. 313 (Jhr.).;