- (1.) IN this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 9.5.1997 passed by the respondent No.2 in S.A.R.Appeal No. 277 -R -15/96 - 97 contained in Annexure -5 as also the order dated 12.8.1996 passed by the respondent No.3 in S.A.R.Case No. 203/1991 contained in Annexure -4 and for quashing the entire proceeding of S.A.R.Case No. 203/1991.
(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioners, a portion of the land of Plot No. 1576 corresponding to Holding No. 488 of HIndpiri, Ranchi was a part of holding which was recorded in the names of Sahoba Munda, Jagarnath Munda, Zagru Munda, Etwa Munda and Mangra Munda, all sons of Homa Munda. The plot in question was recorded as Makan Sahan. Sometime after the municipal survey, Sahoba Munda and other co -tenants died one after the other. The land in question was then surrendered by the surviving tenants to the ex -landlord on 27.9.1936. The ex -landlord came in possession of the said land and subsequently after about three years they settled the land of Plot Nos. 1576 and 1577 with the father of the petitioners by virtue of a Sada Hukumnana dated 15.9.1939 and put him in possession of the said land. The petitioners' father thereafter constructed a house and a shop over the said land after investing a substantial amount. It has been submitted that the ex - landlord had converted the said land into a Chhaparbandi holding. Since thereafter the house and the land have been in continuous possession of the petitioners. The petitioners paid rent to the exlandlord and after vesting of the Estate under the provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, Jamabandi in respect of the said land was created in the name of the petitioners. Suddenly in the year 1991 the respondent No.4 alleging illegal dispossession by the petitioners from the said land, filed an application for restoration of possession in his favour, under the provision of Section 71 (A) of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act (hereinafter referred to as ˜the C. N. T. Act'). The said case was registered as S.A.R.Case No. 203/90 -91 in the Court of the Special Officer, Schedule Area Regulation, Ranchi. Notice was issued to the petitioners. They appeared and filed their reply stating, inter alia, that the claim of illegal possession of the respondent No.4 is wholly false and baseless. The land was validly acquired several decades ago, residential house and shop were also constructed long back, demand was opened in the circle office and they have been in continuous possession. They also brought on record the documents in support of their claim.
(3.) THE Special Officer, however, passed an order dated 12.8.1996 (Annexure -4) allowing the petitioners the respondent No.4 and directing restoration of possession of the said land in his favour.;