Jai Prakash Khaitan Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors. — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Jai Prakash Khaitan Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors. — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respondents directed to issue rent receipt to the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order; parties left free to work out their remedy in accordance with law; pending interlocutory applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether rent receipt should be issued to the petitioner for the land described (Mauza Bhatua, Khata No.156, Plot No.569/5017, 16.33 acres, P.S. Chas, Bokaro). +1 more

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to issue rent receipt to the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.

Ratio / Principle

There being continuance of acceptance of rent by the Zamindar as well as the State Government from 1942 till 2010, merely on the basis of suspicion it cannot be stopped; the valuable right of property of a citizen cannot be doubted or snatched in this manner.

Key takeaways

The parties are at liberty to work out their remedy in accordance with law.obiter¶21
Pending interlocutory application, if any, also stands disposed of.obiter¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Rajesh Kumar, J.), decision dated 05.09.2024 — W.P.(C) No.406 of 2017 — Jai Prakash Khaitan v. State of Jharkhand and others. Petitioner sought issuance of rent receipt for land at Mauza Bhatua, Mouza No.21, P.S. Chas, Bokaro, Khata No.156, Plot No.569/5017, measuring 16.33 acres. He claimed title and possession by settlement of 1942, with rent accepted by the then Zamindar and thereafter by the State Government till 2010, and the predecessor's name maintained in Register-II. Acceptance of rent had been suddenly stopped; the respondents' counter affidavit alleged the petitioner's document appeared fake and submitted that part of the land had been acquired with compensation paid. Court held that continuance of acceptance of rent over such a long period could not be stopped merely on the basis of suspicion, and that the valuable right of property of a citizen cannot be doubted or snatched in this manner. Writ petition disposed of directing respondents to issue rent receipt within two months of receipt/production of a copy of the order; parties at liberty to work out their remedy in accordance with law; pending interlocutory applications disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.406 of 2017

Jai Prakash Khaitan, Son of late Rameshwar Lal Khaitan, Resident of Ratanjee Road, Purana Bazar, P.O. P.S. Bank More, District - Dhanbad. …… Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand.

Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro, P.O. & P.S. - Bokaro, District Bokaro.

Additional Collector, Bokaro, P.O. & P.S. - Bokaro, District Bokaro.

Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Bokaro, P.O. & P.S. - Bokaro, District Bokaro.

Land Acquisition Officer, Bokaro, P.O. & P.S. - Bokaro, District Bokaro.

Circle Officer, Chas at Bokaro, P.O. P.S Chas, District - Bokaro. …... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kr. Das, Advocate For the Resps./State : Mr. S. K. Tiwari, S.C.-I Mr. Ankit Kumar, A.C to S.C.-I

13/Dated: 05th September, 2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The matter relates to issuance of rent receipt to the petitioner. The description of land is as follows :-

“Mauza – Bhatua, Mouza No.21, P.S. - Chas, Bokaro, Khata No.156, Plot No.569/ 5017, Land admeasuring – 16.33 acres.”

3. It has been claimed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got the title and possession over the said piece of land by settlement in the year 1942. The rent has been accepted by the then Zamindar and thereafter, by the State Government till 2010. There is continuance of acceptance of rent and the name of the predecessor of the petitioner has been maintained so far as Register – II is concerned. It has further been submitted that suddenly the acceptance of rent has been stopped and in the counter affidavit, plea has been taken by the respondents that the document produced by the petitioner appears to be fake. It has further been submitted that even the part of the land has been acquired and compensation has also been paid.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of record, it appears that there is continuance of

- 1 - W.P.(C) No.406 of 2017

acceptance of rent by the Zamindar as well as by the State Government for a pretty long period. The rent is being accepted since year 1942 till 2010. Merely on the basis of suspicion, the same cannot be stopped. The valuable right of property of a citizen cannot be doubted or snatched in this manner.

5. Accordingly, the present writ petition is, hereby disposed of directing the respondents to issue rent receipt to the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt / production of copy of this order.

However, the parties are at liberty to work out their remedy in accordance with law.

6. With the above observation and direction, the present writ petition is, hereby, disposed of.

7. Pending interlocutory application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

Chandan/-

- 2 - W.P.(C) No.406 of 2017