Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    Ram Chandra Ram v. State Of Bihar

    Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.:— Delay of 106 days in preferring the appeal is condoned. I.A No. 6191 of 2017 is allowed. The appeal is thereafter taken up on merits.

    2. The impugned order is dated 03.05.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge. The writ application has been dismissed. The learned Single Judge concluded as under for the reason of dismissal of the writ application.

    “As stated, the rule-provision which now governs such settlement of the canal chart/land provides for settlement of the land by inviting application and draw of lots. It specifically provides for settlement of the canal chart/land for a period of 03 years and further that once a person is granted the State largesse, he shall not be eligible for such privilege on the second occasion immediately. This Court is of the considered view that the respondent(s) are obliged to settle the chat land of the Irrigation Department strictly in accordance with the Rules framed by the State Government. If the petitioner falls in the category of eligible persons they may apply and compete with others in accord with the Rules. On the basis of Annexure-2 to 12 of the writ petition, they cannot be accepted as the permanent settlee(s) of the canal chat/land of the Irrigation Department.”

    3. There is no concept and there is no occasion for any irrigation SDO to settle the chat land of the Sone Canal on a permanent basis. Even according to the earlier rules and the present rule in existence such settlement is required to be made for a fixed period only, therefore, obviously what is being claimed by the appellants is a farce, which has been played out. The learned Single Judge having seen through the game has rightly dismissed the writ application.

    4. The appeal has no merit and it is dismissed.

    5. The respondent authorities are free to remove these appellants, who are in possession on the basis of the so called permanent settlement made in their favour. Such removal should be effected within four weeks from the date of production/communication of a copy of this order.

    6. A copy of this order will be marked to the District Magistrate, Rohtas for implementation of the direction.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Ram Chandra Ram v. State Of Bihar
    (Dec 15, 2017)