Allowed

Hira Ghansi v. The State Of Jharkhand Through The Chief Secretary And Ors.

Jharkhand HC11 Apr 2018WPC/7098/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed a writ petition quashing an order that canceled the petitioner's Jamabandi. The court held the notice was vague and did not specify the purpose or potential action, and the cancellation order was passed without hearing the petitioner, violating natural justice. The matter was remanded for a fresh order after giving a proper hearing.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 22.06.2015 canceling the Jamabandi was set aside. The matter was remanded to the L.R.D.C., Chatra, to pass a fresh order after affording the petitioner a proper opportunity of hearing.

Hira Ghansi Vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The… — Writ and Judicial Review | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 7098 of 2016

¶3

……….

¶4

Hira Ghansi son of Late Bhola Ghansi, Resident of Village Saradhu, P.O. Saradhu, P.S. Tandawa, District Chatra. … Petitioner.

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand, through the Chief Secretary, Project Bhawan, H.E.C., P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶7

The Deputy Commissioner, Chatra, P.O. & P.S. Chatra, District Chatra.

¶8

The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Chatra, P.O. & P.S. Chatra, District Chatra.

¶9

The Sub Divisional Magistrate, P.O. & P.S. Chatra, District Chatra.

¶10

The Additional Collector, P.O. & P.S. Chatra, District Chatra.

¶11

The Circle Officer, P.O. & P.S. Tandawa, District Chatra.... Respondents.

¶12

¶13

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.

¶14

¶15

For the petitioner: Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the Respondents: J.C. to G.A.

¶16

¶17

03/11.04.2018. The petitioner, in this writ application, has challenged the order dated 22.06.2015 passed by the respondent no.2, whereby a long standing Jamabandi in the name of the petitioner has been canceled.

¶18

The petitioner claims that Jamabandi in relation to Khata no. 278, plot no.1631 and 1663 area 50.99 Acres, Thana No. 29 of Mouja Saradhu stands in the name of Harshnath Ghansi son of Deonath Ghansi, who are ancestors of this petitioner. The Jamabandi was opened in the year 1945. He submits that the petitioner is in possession of the land in question and rent receipts were issued in their favour, but surprisingly by order dated 22.06.2015 long standing Jamabandi in favour of the petitioner was canceled by the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra. He submits that the order is absolutely bad in law and it violates the principle of nature justice. It is submitted that the notice was issued by the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Chatra, to appear before him on 24.06.2015, but the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Chatra, recommended for cancellation of Jamabandi on 22.06.2015 and forwarded the same to the Deputy commissioner, and on the same very date in a hurried manner without hearing the petitioner, canceled the long standing Jamabandi. He submits that the entire process smells malice.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the order has been passed without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶20

Counsel for the State states that the petitioner as per notice dated 22.06.2015 failed to appear. As the notice suggests that the date fixed was 24.06.2015/22.06.2015, the petitioner should have appeared on 22.06.2015, but he did not avail the opportunity given to him. He submits that it was found that the Jamabandi opened in the name of the ancestors of the petitioner was in a suspicious manner and the M. Form was not duly filed up. Thus, Jamabandi was canceled.

¶21

After hearing the parties and after going through the records, I find that the notice was issued by the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Chatra, which is signed on 04.06.2015, wherein the petitioner was only asked to appear before him along with necessary documents in respect of land of Khata no. 278, area 50.99 Acres of Mouza Sarathu. Nowhere in the said notice it has been mentioned as for what purpose the petitioner was called for and the respondents were intending to cancel the Jamaband.

¶22

A notice has to be specific and should state the purpose. It should also mention about the action, the authority intend to take if the direction in the notice is not complied with. A vague notice cannot be said to be a notice in the eyes of law.

¶23

Further from the notice, I find that there are two dates given in the notice. Original date was 24.06.2015, but besides that in handwriting 22.06.15 was mentioned. Thus, it is also not clear as on which date the petitioner was supposed to appear.

¶24

Further I find that the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Chatra, recommended for cancellation of Jamabandi on 22.06.2015. The said recommendation contained in Annexure-7 was received by the Deputy Commissioner on the same very date and the Deputy Commissioner, on the same very date i.e. on 22.06.2015 cancelled the Jamabandi of the petitioner. Both the recommendation and order of cancellation of Jamabandi do not suggest that the petitioner had appeared before Authority.

¶25

Thus, I find that the order dated 22.06.2015 cancelling the long standing Jamabandi in the year 2015, which was opened in the year 1945, by the respondents, is without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Further the initial notice is also vague.

¶26

Thus, the impugned order dated 22.06.2015 is in violation of the

¶27

principle of nature justice, which is liable to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 22.06.2015 cancelling the long standing Jamabandi in the name of the petitioner is hereby set aside. The matter is remanded to the L.R.D.C., Chatra, for passing of a fresh order, after giving proper opportunity to the petitioner.

¶28

This application is, thus, allowed.

¶29

(Ananda Sen, J)

¶30

Sharma/

Hira Ghansi v. The State Of Jharkhand Through The Chief Secretary And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hira Ghansi v. The State Of Jharkhand Through The Chief Secretary And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shib Kali Banerjee Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Ahmed Hussain Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Permeshwar Hansda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amit Malakar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anjela Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sarwan Sahu Alias Sarwan Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand