P.K.BALASUBRAMANYAN, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition challenges the order passed by the Court of the Deputy Commissioner -cum - District Magistrate, Bokaro in Misc. Case No. 52/ 2003.
(2.) THE complaint raised is about the decision dated 16.12.2003 as rendered by the Deputy Commissioner, pursuant to the direction issued by this Court in CWJC No. 3613 of 2000 (R). By that judgment, one of us (Mr. Justice Tapen Sen) had directed, on the agreement of all the parties before him, including the intervenor, to decide the issue afresh. Pursuant to that direction, instead of issuing notices to the Director, Project Land Rehabilitation, Bokaro and the Intervenor, the Deputy Commissioner proceeded to pass the order, Annexure -10 in the writ petition. This is clear from the proceeding sheet, produced along with it. The said proceeding sheet does not show that any notice was issued to Director, Project Land Rehabilitation, Bokaro or the intervenor who has come forward challenging the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, essentially on the ground that the direction issued by this Court in CWJC No. 3613 of 2000 (R) has not been complied with and all the parties concerned, including himself, were not heard. It is also submitted that the reasons given in the order for intervention were all untenable.
(3.) THE learned counsel for respondents 6 and 7 submitted that the writ petitioner has no locus standi, since he was not having any right in the property and the Deputy Commissioner rightly did not issue notice to him. But he could not show that notice was issued to the Director, Project Land Rehabilitation, Bokaro.;