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

2023 Supreme(Jhk) 1558

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
Shahnawaz Sheikh - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand and ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 1469 of 2022
Decided On : 18-09-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Md. Mokhtar Khan, Advocate, Mr. Faisal Allam, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Rahul Saboo, GP-I, Mr. Kunal Chandra Suman, AC to GP-I, Mr. A.K. Das, Advocate, Mr. Shivam Utkarsh Sahay, Advocate

Inordinate delay undermines claims for compensation in land disputes unless justified.

Headnote:Statute analysis: The petitioner seeks compensation for land taken by the respondents without due process, invoking provisions of Cr.P.C. Facts: The petitioners' family has claimed ownership and suffered dispossession without compensation. Findings: The court found the land was legally transferred to CCL.

Issues: Whether the petition for compensation was tenable given the delay and prior knowledge of dispossession.

Ratio Decidendi: Court held inordinate delay undermines claims unless adequately explained.

Result: The writ petition is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. claims for compensation due to dispossession are made. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. respondents contest the claim based on legal title. (Para 5 , 6)
3. court reviews the legitimacy of property claims based on records. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. long delays can preclude relief due to legal principles. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 14)
5. court ultimately dismisses the petition. (Para 15 , 16 , 17)

ORDER :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner with respect to the land appertaining to Khata No. 1, Plot No. 1, measuring an area of 2.50 acres of Mouza-Naisarai, P.S Ramgarh Cantt. (Old P.S Mandu), District-Hazaribagh (now Ramgarh) or for issuance of direction upon the respondent-CCL to hand over the vacant possession of the said land to the petitioner as according to him, the respondent-CCL has forcibly taken possession of the said land.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner’s father namely, Haider Sheikh @ Sheikh Mohammad Haider Ali and his brother namely, Sheikh Ahmad Raja had purchased the said land by virtue of sale deed dated 30.11.1972 from the erstwhile owner namely, Shri Mahesh Tiwari and thereafter they got their name mutated vide order dated 21/29.04.1975 passed in Mutation Case No. 383 of 1974-75. The rent of the said land was also paid from the year 1975 to 1979. However, the respondent-CCL illegally took possession of the said land and constructed houses thereupon. As soon as the petitioners’ father came to know about the said fact, he wrote several letters to the respondent-company, however, all went in vain.

3. It is further submitted that a proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C was initiated vide Case No. M-146/1975 on the application of the petitioner’s father and uncle, wherein Director of Mines, Rescue Station, Ramgarh, Karanpura Coal Field was made second party. The said proceeding was subsequently converted into a proceeding under Section 145 Cr.P.C upon application filed by the petitioner’s father and uncle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner’s father wrote letter to the respondent no. 5 – the General Manager (Land and Revenue), Central Coalfields Ltd., Ranchi on 07.07.2003 seeking compensation for the said land, however, the said respondent vide letter dated 30.08.2003, rejected the claim of compensation made by him. Thereafter, the petitioner raised online grievance in the portal of Ministry of Coal, Government of India, New Delhi through Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS) on 22.10.2014, however, till date neither any compensation for the said land has been paid to the petitioner nor possession of the same has been restored in his favour.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that the said land is recorded in the khatian as Gair Majarua Khas land and the rent receipt of the said land has not been issued since 1979. On inspection of revenue records, jamabandi of the said land is also not found in the name of Haider Sheikh @ Sheikh Md. Haider Ali.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent-CCL submits that the said land was transferred to the CCL by the State Government in September 1972 after following due procedure of law and the CCL had also paid ‘Salami’ for the same on 28.09.1972. Thus, the claim of the petitioner for payment of compensation of the said land is not tenable. It is further submitted that the present writ petition has been filed after a huge delay and as such, the same is liable to be dismissed on the said score as well.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

8. On bare perusal of the reply of the respondent no. 5 (Annexure-2 to the supplementary affidavit dated 08.09.2023 filed on behalf of the petitioner), it is evident that the said land including other lands measuring an area of 9.68 acres were transferred to the CCL by the State Gove

      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 Back to top