For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashutosh Kr. Singh, Advocate Mr. Amit Kumar Verma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Binod Singh, SC (L&C) Mr. Vishal Kr. Singh, JC to SC (L&C) Order No. 12 Dated: 30.08.2017 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 31.10.2006 passed by the respondent no. 2 Commissioner, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka, in R.M.A. No.
35 of 200102 and the order dated 09.01.2002 passed by the respondent no. 3 Deputy Commissioner, Dumka in R.M.A. No. 29 of 200102, whereby the order dated 12.02.2001 passed by the respondent no. 4 SubDivisional Officer, Dumka in P.A. Case No.
96 of 200001 appointing the petitioner as Pradhan of Mouza Dalgopahari has been setaside.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a jamabandi raiyat of MouzaDalgopahari and a resident of adjacent village Palobandh. MouzaDalgopahari, P.S. Ramgarh, SubDivisionDumka is a Khas Mouza and the Pradhan is appointed under the Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act, 1949 by the respondent no. 4. The petitioner and the respondent no. 6, after 2the death of the Pradhan of the village, applied separately before the respondent no. 4 for appointing them as Pradhan of the MouzaDalgopahari under the provision of Section 5 of the Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act, 1949, whereupon P.A. Case No. 96 of 200001 was registered in the court of SubDivisional Officer, Dumka. The Circle Officer, Ramgarh, after obtaining the enquiry report from Revenue Karamchari, submitted his report vide letter no. 5 dated 10.01.2001 to the respondent no. 4. The Revenue Karamchari submitted report in favour of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Pradhan of VillageDalgopahari. The respondent no. 4 vide order dated 12.02.2001 passed in P.A. Case No. 96 of 200001 allowed the application of the petitioner and appointed him as Pradhan of the VillageDalgopahari. The respondent no. 4 further directed the petitioner to deposit the amount of security and Kabuliyat within a month. It is further submitted that subsequently, the respondent no. 6 filed an appeal before the respondent no. 3 being R.M.A. No. 29 of 200101. However, the respondent no. 3 without affording any opportunity to the petitioner, passed the order on 09.01.2002 settingaside the order passed by the respondent no. 4 with a direction to the respondent no. 4 for initiation of fresh proceeding for appointment of Pradhan and as such, the matter was remanded back to the respondent no. 4. Aggrieved by the order passed by the respondent no. 3, the petitioner challenged the appeal before the respondent no. 2 being R.M.A. No. 35 of 200102. However, the respondent no. 2 vide order dated 31.10.2006 did not interfere with the order passed by the respondent no. 3 and observed that the respondent no. 4 the SubDivisional Officer, Dumka was supposed to pass a fresh order for appointment of village Pradhan as per Section 5 of the Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act, 1949.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the information, the respondent no. 4 has not yet passed fresh 3order in terms with the order of remand passed by the respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 2. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the present writ petition was filed in the year 2007 and the respondent no. 4 has not yet passed the fresh order in relation to appointment of village Pradhan, the respondent no. 4 may be directed to pass an order in this regard within a time frame.
4. Mr. Binod Singh, the learned SC (L&C) appearing for the respondentState submits that the SubDivisional Officer, Dumka, who is physically present before this Court, shall pass appropriate order in relation to appointment of Village Pradhan in terms with Section 5 of the Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act, 1949 within a period of twelve weeks from today.
5. In view of the said submission made by the Mr. Binod Singh, the learned SC (L&C), the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 4 SubDivisional Officer, Dumka to pass a fresh order appointing the Village Pradhan of MouzaDalgopahari, P.S.Ramgarh, SubDivisionDumka under Section 5 of the Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act, 1949 within a period of twelve weeks from today. The petitioner and respondent no. 6 shall cooperate in the said proceeding. However, it is made clear that the respondent no. 4 shall not be prejudiced by any observation made by the respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 2 in the orders dated 09.01.2002 and 31.10.2006 respectively.
6. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation/direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Manish/N.A.F.R.
Comments