Dismissed

Uma Shankar Bux Roy v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC28 Nov 2022WPC/1256/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand dismissed a writ petition seeking to quash a revisional order setting aside a rent fixation decree. The court observed that conflicting Jamabandi entries existed for the same land and directed the State to fix procedures to prevent such irregularities in revenue records.

What did the court decide?

Direction given to Secretary, Department of Revenue, to look into such matters and evolve a basic method for mutation.

Uma Shankar Bux Roy Vs State of Jharkhand — Land Acquisition | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Civil Writ Jurisdiction) W.P. (C) No. 1256 of 2011

¶2

….....

¶3

Uma Shankar Bux Roy …. ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Others …. ..... Respondents

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO

¶5

…......... For the Petitioner : None. For the respondents / State : None. For the Private Respondents : None.

¶6

The matter is being taken up through Video Conferencing. Bar has no complaint with respect to audio and video qualities.

¶7

10/28.11.2022.

¶8

Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner nor on behalf of the respondents / State or on behalf of the private respondents.

¶9

Petitioner – Uma Shankar Bux Roy, son of Late Lalu Nand Kishore Bux Roy, resident of Village and Post Office, P.S. - Chhatarpur, District – Palamau has preferred this writ petition on 08.03.2011 for quashing the order dated 20.09.2010 passed by the learned Court of Additional Collector, Palamau in A.R. Appeal No. XV/14/2008-09, whereby and whereunder the learned court has been pleased to allow the appeal by reversing the judgment passed by the Circle Officer, Chattarpur, Palamau, whereby the Circle Officer has recommended for fixation of rent in favour of the petitioner in Rent Fixation Case No. 2/2008-09.

¶10

It appears from the writ petition that the land of Village – Bara, P.S. - Chattarpur, District – Palamau, Khata No. 75, Plot No. 551, measuring area of 0.23 acres was owned and possessed by exlandlord Rajmata Jamuna Kumar, who had undisputed title over the land and later on, settled the same in the name of the mother of the petitioner namely, Manketki Devi on 21.01.1949 on the basis of essential salami in this regard. Soon after the settlement, the mother of the petitioner had obtained the right, title and interest over the same and since then she had been in the continuous possession over the same. Later on, she decided to create a Jamabandi in favour of the petitioner and for which, she made an affidavit also because due to acute weakness, being an old lady 85 years of age, she is not able to move.

¶11

-2-

¶12

It further appears, that the petitioner, for making Jamabandi in his favour, has placed an application before the Circle Officer, Chattarpur and the Rent Fixation Case No. 2/08-09 was initiated and spot verification was done by the local authority and submitted the inspection report dated 27.10.2008, showing that the land in dispute was settled in the name of the mother of the petitioner.

¶13

It further appears that after spot verification publication (Aam Istihar) was also done for obtaining objection if any by the Circle Officer, Chattarpur, Palamau on 27.10.2008. Later on the petitioner has also placed an application before the Circle Officer, Chattarpur, Palamau to create a jamabandi in his favour on 29.03.2008 and after consideration of the objection, the Circle Officer, Chattarpur, Palamau has made a recommendation also to the Sub Divisional Officer, Chattarpur, in which he clearly submitted, that the said land was under the possession of the mother of the petitioner, as such rent was fixed vide Letter No. 239 dated 09.06.2008.

¶14

It further appears that the Additional Collector, Palamau in A.R. Appeal No. XV/14/2008-09 preferred by one Rajendra Kumar Singh and others, decided the case against the petitioner by setting aside the order passed by the Circle Officer, Chattarpur, Palamau in Rent Fixation Case No. 2/2008-09 on the ground that prior to taking decision with regard to rent fixation in favour of Uma Shankar Bux Roy, facts of A.R. Case No. 25/1977-78 has not been considered by the lower court and without properly examining the revenue paper, rent has been fixed in favour of Manketki Devi.

¶15

It has also been mentioned in order dated 20.09.2010 passed in A.R. Appeal No. XV/14/2008-09 that there is allegation of connivance of the Karamchari with the Uma Shankar Bux Roy and others, whereas the appellants, Rajendra Kumar Singh and others have possession over the land and they have filed Dakhil Kharij Case No. 250/2008-09, which was not taken care of by the revenue authority.

¶16

It appears that in the State of Jharkhand, the Circle officer and their superior authorities are not familiar to the Bihar / Jharkhand

¶17

-3-

¶18

Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973, underSection 14 of the Act, requisition for disposal of mutation cases has been filed before the Anchal Adhikari. Against the said order, there is a provision of appeal before the Land Reforms Deputy Collector under Section 15 of the Act and subsequently, there is provision of revision before the Collector of the District under Section 16 of the Act.

¶19

It appears that though the officers are mentioning in the order that there is connivance of Halka Karamchari with some private parties, but no action has been taken by the State because of the reason best known to the higher authority of the State and thus, there are litigations pending before this High Court, where the State Officers are not able to clarify the stand of the State of Jharkhand.

¶20

It appears that on the basis of a document, the petitioner has claimed the land, which is of dated 21.01.1949, this Court is not aware of the fact that whether this document is suspicious document or not and whether the document has to be enquired under Section 4 (h) of the Bihar / Jharkhand Land Reforms Act, 1950 or not, but it appears that the revenue machinery has failed in the State of Jharkhand and thus, such illegal procedure are being allowed before the revenue authority and the cases are pending since 2011 and they are not able to assist this Court properly.

¶21

The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand is directed to look into such matters including the present case and evolve a method atleast to protect the government land and also a basic method for mutation as envisaged under Bihar / Jharkhand Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Record) Act, 1973.

¶22

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as for the same piece of land, Revenue authorities have created two jamabandi one in the name of Rajendra Kumar Singh vide A.R. Case No. 25/197778 and subsequently in favour of writ petitioner, Uma Shankar Roy Bux vide Rent Fixation Case No. 02/2008-09, which requires proper enquiry by Revenue Authority.

¶23

-4-

¶24

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand through FAX / e-mail.

¶25

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)

¶26

Sunil/-

Uma Shankar Bux Roy v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uma Shankar Bux Roy v. State of Jharkhand

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

Adhunik Alloys and Power Limited through Its Authorised Signatory Shri Sanjay Pratap and Anr. Vs Ministry of Coal

Primary Cum Middle Sanskrit School through Its Head Master Saroj Kumar Jha Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary School Education and Literacy Deptt

Arun Kumar Singh Alias Bittu Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Umesh Chandra Gupta Vs Agriculture Produce Market Com

Md.Moiuddin And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Brishlal Mahto And Ors. Vs Central Coalfileds Ltd. And Ors.