Objection before the Deputy commissioner against settlement of waste land and vacant holdings

(1) A person, if aggrieved by any act of the village headman or muraiyat or landlord, as the case may be, in setting or refusing to settle waste land or a vacant holding, or if aggrieved by any act of any other person in respect of such land or holding, may make an application before the Deputy Commissioner within one year from the year on which reclamationin pursuance of settlement was commenced or settlement was refused.

(2) (a) On receipt of such an application the Deputy Commissioner shall serve in the prescribed manner on the parties interested other than the applicant, notice of the date on which he intends to hear and decide the application.

Explanation.-For the purpose of this clause all th Jamabandi raiyats of the village and the village headman or mulraiyat if it is pradhani village or mulraiyate village or the landlord if it is khas village, shall be deemed to be parties interested.

(b) After serving the notice required by clause (a) and hearing the parties and the enquiry the Deputy Commissioner may, in cases where settlement has been made, either confirm or modify or set aside the settlement, or, in cases where settlement has been refused, order the waste land or vacant holding to be settled. He may himself settle the land or holding in question with a jamabandi raiyat in accordance with the principles laid down in Section 28 and in the record-of-rights on such terms as he may think proper.

(3) No claim for compensation by any person evicted from land reclaimed or held in contravention of the provisions of this Act or any law or anything having the force of law in the Santal Parganas shall be admissible. The provisions of Section 32 are applicable only in respect of such cases where settlements have been made after coming into force of the Act. The settlements which were made by the village Pradhanbefore coming into force of the Act cannot be modified or varied or set aside in term of Section 32 of the Act. The provisions of the said Act have a prospective operation. [Ghanshyam Pandit v. Commissioner, 1988 P L J R 140].