SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Jhk) 687

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
Dhena Hansda – Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand – Respondent


JUDGMENT

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





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top