SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
Dhena Hansda – Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand – Respondent
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.
1. The writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners against the appellate order dated 23rd May, 2002 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Santhal Parganas Division, Dumka, in R.M. Appeal No. 142 of 1997/ 98, whereby and whereunder, the order dated 20th June. 1997 passed by Settlement Officer, Dumka in R.E. Case No. 1 of 1997-98/MP Case No. 53 of 1990 has been set aside.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the lands, in question, were recorded in the last survey settlement in the names of their ancestors, who are Scheduled Tribes. The lands are non-transferable, Jamabandi lands of Scheduled Tribes (Santhals). Its acquisition was made in favour of non-tribal ex-landlord, which was illegal,
3. It appears that out of 8 Bighas, 16 Kathas and 12 Dhurs of lands of Mouza Sarasdangal disputed 6 Bighas, 13 Kathas and 1 Dhur of Raiyati agricultural lands were acquired by the S.D.O., Dumka in L.A. Case No. 5 of 36-37 in favour of the landlord Noni Gopal Banerjee under Section 25 (A) of Regulation II of 1886 (The Santhal Parganas Rent Regulation, 1886) after following the prescribed procedure and on payment of compensation to the jamabandi raiyat. Therefore
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.