IMPORTANT POINT
The principles of delay and laches can bar claims in writ petitions, emphasizing the need for timely action in legal proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

I.A. No.965 of 2024

1. This interlocutory application has been preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 37 days in preferring this Letters Patent Appeal.

2. Heard the parties.

3. Having regard to the averments made in the application and submissions made on behalf of the appellant, we are of the view that the appellant was prevented from sufficient cause in filing the appeal within the period of limitation. As such, the delay of 37 days in preferring the appeal is hereby condoned.

4. I.A. No. 965 of 2024 stands allowed.

I.A. No.2471 of 2024

5. The instant interlocutory application has been filed by the applicants, namely Sulochana Choudhary and Suman Kumar Lall seeking leave of this Court to permit them to intervene in the instant Letters Patent Appeal by adding them as party respondents.

6. Mr. Amritansh Vats, learned counsel appearing for the proposed interveners, has submitted that by this interlocutory application the proposed interveners seek indulgence of this Court to allow them to intervene the present Letters Patent Appeal, as the applicants are the residents of the same mohalla, i.e., Hurhuru, and the road in question is the only access road for the applicants for ingress and outgress.

7. It has further been submitted that the order that may be passed in the present appeal, if any, in favour of the appellant, can affect the rights of the present applicants.

8. Learned counsel for the applicants, on the aforesaid ground, has submitted that the applicants may be allowed to intervene the present Letters Patent Appeal by adding them as party respondents.

9. Heard the parties.

10. There is no objection on the part of either the appellants or the respondents if the present interlocutory application will be allowed.

11. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and submission made on behalf of the applicants, we are of the view that the present interlocutory application needs to be allowed.

12. Accordingly, I.A. No.2471 of 2024 is allowed.

13. Office is directed to make necessary correction in the cause title of the case.

L.P.A. No.610 of 2023

14. The instant appeal, under clause 10 of the Letters Patent, is directed against the judgment/order dated 14.08.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) No.2522 of 2019 whereby and whereunder the learned Single Judge has declined to pass positive direction with respect to the claim of the petitioner for compensation in lieu of utilization of land for the purpose of road, however, with a liberty to take appropriate recourse in the matter before the competent court of civil jurisdiction.

15. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition is required to be enumerated which reads as under:-

It is the case of the petitioner that the land situated at village- Cantonment, Mohalla Hurhuru, P.S. No 157, District-Hazaribagh under Khata No. 90, Plot No.904 and 905 measuring an area of 54 decimals was purchased in the name of Mrs. Helen Bala wife of Mr. G.G. Soren, the mother of appellant by virtue of Registered Sale Deed No.5522 dated 24.8.1954.

16. After purchase of the land, the mother of the appellant came in possession over the same and her name had been mutated in the Revenue Office and Rent Receipt issued in her name against the payment of rent to the Government.

17. During her life time, the mother of the petitioner has sold an area of 12 decimals out of 54 decimals (in Plot No. 904, 3 decimals out of 0.18 decimal and plot no. 905, 9 decimals out of 36 decimals) to one Pritha Jemes Herenj after due permission of Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh under the provision of C.N.T. Act, since she belonged to Scheduled Tribe Community and an area of 0.42 decimals left under her possession.

18. The mother of the petitioner passed away sometimes in the year 2003. Thereafter the petitioner got his name mutated by succession vide Mutation Case No. 698 of 2002-2003 in respect of