Back
2007 Supreme(Jhk) 30
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
R.K. MERATHIA, J
Birendra Narayan and Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State of Jharkhand and Ors. – Respondent
Decided On : 11.01.2007
Arbitrary cancellation of settlements without providing an opportunity to show cause is impermissible and may lead to compensation for the affected parties.
Headnote:
Arbitrary Cancellation - Settlement of Ponds - The court held that the cancellation of settlements made in favor of the petitioners without giving them an opportunity to show cause was arbitrary. The court directed the respondents to return the deposits made by the petitioners against the settlement along with a lump sum compensation of Rs. 15,000/- each.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the cancellation of their settlements with regard to two ponds, claiming that the cancellation was arbitrary and caused them huge loss.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the cancellation of settlements made in favor of the petitioners was arbitrary as they were not given any opportunity to show cause. The court directed the respondents to compensate the petitioners.
Issues: Cancellation of settlements without opportunity to show cause, arbitrary action by the respondents, compensation for the petitioners.
Ratio Decidendi: The cancellation of settlements without giving the petitioners an opportunity to show cause was held to be arbitrary, leading to the direction for compensation to the petitioners.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to return the deposits made by the petitioners against the settlement along with a lump sum compensation of Rs. 15,000/- each.
R.K. Merathia, J
1. As prayed Mr. Rajiv Sharma is permitted to delete the name of respondent No. 5.
2. The petitioners have jointly filed this writ petition challenging the cancellation of their settlements with regard to two ponds for the period 1.4.2003 to 31.3.2006. The petitioners' case is that on 15.7.2004 the said settlement was cancelled without any opportunity to show cause. It is further submitted that the petitioners have suffered huge loss due to such arbitrary action of the respondents.
3. Learned Counsel for the State submitted that after settlement was made, a representation was received from the respondent Nos 6 and 7, who belong to Scheduled Tribe Community, for settling the said ponds in their favour and on such representation a committee took a decision to settle the same with respondent Nos. 6 and 7 after cancelling the settlement made in favour of the petitioners. Accordingly, the settlements were cancelled and the said ponds were settled in favour of respondent Nos. 5 and 6, till 31.3.2007.
4. Admittedly the settlement was made in favour of the petitioners. Before cancelling the same they were not given any opportunity to show cause. In the circumstances, it has to be held that the said action of cancellation of settlements made in favour of the petitioners was arbitrary.
5. However, as the period of said settlement expired on 31.3.2006, the only order which can be passed in this writ petition now is, for compensating the petitioners.
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in order to put an end to this litigation, I direct the respondents that the deposits made by the petitioners against the settlement should be returned to them along with a lump sum compensation of Rs. 15,000/- each within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.
