JUDGMENT

Mr. Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. – Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the Respondent-State.

2. Respondent No.5 has not entered appearance despite repeated steps for service of notice and also paper publication. It is on the application of the Respondent no.5 being R.E.R Case No.21/1980-81 that the Sub Divisional Officer, Godda, Respondent no.4 directed eviction of the petitioner under Section 42 of the Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act, 1949 by the impugned order dated 21.5.1984 (Annexure-3) from the piece of land comprising Plot no. 768 and 769 at Mouza Parsha, Thana Mahagama, District Godda measuing 19 dhoors and 2 Kathas 5 dhoors respectively. In appeal being R.M.A. Case No. 20/1984-85 preferred by the aggrieved petitioners, the order dated 21.5.1984 passed by the Respondent no.4 was affirmed by the Respondent no.3, Deputy Commissioner, Godda vide order dated 22.12.1986 (Annexure-5). The Revisional Authority, Commissioner, Santhal Pargana Division at Dumka, Respondent no.2 also did not find any infirmity in the order of eviction and the affirmed the same in R.M.R. No. 411/1986-87 by the impugned order dated 23.3.2001(Annexure-6).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in