Patna High Court
Nathuni Singh @ Nathuni Singh Yadav And ... vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 13 September, 2022
Author: Sandeep Kumar
Bench: Sandeep Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16985 of 2018
======================================================
1. Nathuni Singh @ Nathuni Singh Yadav Son of late Chhathu Singh.
2. Narayan Singh Son of Late Faguni Singh.
3. Surendra Kumar Son of Late Faguni Singh.
All Resident of Village-Barun Bigha, Police Station-Barun, District-
Aurangabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Land Reforms Department,
Govt. of Bihar, Patna
2. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Aurangabad.
3. The Land Acquisition Officer, Aurangabad.
4. The Additional Collector, Aurangabad.
5. The Circle Officer, Barun Anchal, Distirct-Aurangabad.
6. The Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Railway, Govt. of
India, New Delhi.
7. The Executive Director (Land and Amenities-1), Eastern Dedicated Freight
Corridor, Railway Project Anchal Jain (Bihar)
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Kamlendra Pd. Singh, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan- SC 25
Mr. Wasi Ahmad Khan, AC to SC 25
For the Union of India : Dr. K.N. Singh, Addl. Sol. General
For Respondent No.7 : Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gupta, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 13-09-2022
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has prayed for following reliefs in this
writ petition:-
"I. To quash the order dated 19.05.2017
passed by the Additional Collector, Aurangabad
(Repondent No.3) in Jamabandi cancellation Case
Patna High Court CWJC No.16985 of 2018 dt.13-09-2022
2/12
No. 57/2016-17 / 109/2016-17 (Annexure- 10)
cancelling the Jamabandi No. 67/6 pertaining to
land of Khesra No. 1712 corresponding to Khata
No. 224, Thana No. 155 Mauza Barun without
considering any document produced before him.
II. To command and direct the respondents
particularly respondent nos. 6 and 7 not proceed
with work of construction over the land aforesaid.
III. To command and direct the respondent no. 2 to
pay adequate compensation for the land aforesaid
and for the Darwaja standing thereon of which
forcibly possession has been taken by demolishing
the Darwaja (Dochara) in arbitrary manner.
IV. To grant any other relief/ reliefs to which the
petitioner may be entitled to.
V. To permit the petitioners to add any relief or
reliefs if the occasion so arises."
The case of the petitioners is that ex-landlord of estate
Rai Banku Bihari settled 2 bighas and 10 kathas of land by
issuing Bandobasti Parwana of Khata No. 224 in favour of
Chhatu Singh Yadav, father of petitioner no.1 and grand-father
of petitioner nos.2 and 3 on 30.08.1948. The father of petitioner
no.1 and grand-father of petitioner nos.2 and 3 came in
possession and started paying rent to the ex-landlord and in
token thereof, the ex-landlord issued rent receipt. The ex-
landlord, at the time of vesting Zamindari, submitted return
showing the father of petitioner no.1 and one Ram Ratan Singh
as raiyat in possession which was recognized/approved by the
then Additional Collector, Aurangabad in Compensation Case
No. 273/23 / 53-54. After vesting Zamindari in the State of
Patna High Court CWJC No.16985 of 2018 dt.13-09-2022
3/12
Bihar, ex-landlord filed return in which Chhatu Singh Yadav,
father of petitioner no.1 and grand-father of petitioner nos. 2 and
3 was recognized as raiyat and Jamabandi was created in his
name and his name was entered in Register-II and and he
continuously paid rent and granted rent receipts till 1986. Rent
receipts from 1961 to 1986 have been annexed to the writ
petition. Chhathu Singh Yadav died in the year 1986 and
thereafter the name of petitioner no.1 Nathuni Yadav @ Nathuni
Singh was substituted with the name of petitioner no.1 Nathuni
Yadav as Karta of Hindu Undivided Family. The brother of
petitioner no.1 Faguni Singh died in 2008 leaving behind his
two sons, namely, petitioner nos. 2 and 3 and since then the rent
was paid and rent receipts were being issued in the name of
Karta of the family, petitioner no.1.
It has been contended by the petitioners that the father
of petitioner no.1 and Ram Ratan Singh Yadav were settlees of
the land in question and land in question was settled to them and
since 1948 they were in possession of the land. The landlord
submitted return in their names showing them as raiyat in
cultivating possession which was recognized by the State of
Bihar which also accepted rent by granting rent receipts.
It has further been contended by the petitioners that 1
Patna High Court CWJC No.16985 of 2018 dt.13-09-2022
4/12
bigha 2 kathas of land was purchased by petitioner no.1 by a
registered sale deed no. 9912 dated 18.07.1977 from Ram Ratan
Singh, another settlee of plot no.1712 corresponding to Khata
No. 224, Thana No. 155 situated in village Barun.
The Railway, under Section 20(K)(1) of the Railways
Act, issued a communique and published it in the daily
newspaper regarding acquisition of land for the Special Railway
Project, namely, Eastern Dedicated Freight Corridor in which
land belonging to different raiyats of different villages situated
within Barun Block was notified for acquisition in which 3 acres
28 decimals of land in plot no 1712 situated in village Barun
was proposed to be acquired and out of total area of 3.28 acres
in plot no. 1712, an area measuring about 6 decimal belonging
to the petitioners was acquired by the Railways. The notification
for the purpose was published in the Gazette of India dated
18.04.2016and in the newspaper dated 13.05.2016. The person who has right, title and interest in the land acquired, was directed to file objection before the District Land Acquisition Officer, Aurangabad. Later resolution no. 925 dated 11.11.2014 issued by the Revenue and Land Reform Department by the Government of India made guidelines for deciding the ownership of Bakasht, Gairmazarua Malik and other Patna High Court CWJC No.16985 of 2018 dt.13-09-2022 5/12 Government land.
The clause 'Gha' of the Explanation provides that land was settled by ex-landlord by Sada Hukumnama and return was also filed and the settlee was in possession for more than 30 years and hence he was treated as the claimant of land.
The Circle Officer, Barun issued notice to the petitioners by initiating Land Verification Record Case No. 44 of 2015-16 for deciding as to whether the settlement in favour of the father of petitioner no.1 created any right, title and interest over the land which was in possession of the petitioners and the same was recorded in C.S. Khatian as Gairmazarua Malik. Petitioners appeared and submitted the settlement Parwana and certified copy of Compensation Case No. 273/23 / 53-54 in which the names of the father of petitioner no.1 and one Ram Ratan Singh were shown as raiyat and also produced rent receipts from 1948 to 53 and 1961 to 2014-15 but the Circle Officer, Barun recommended for cancellation of Jamabandi standing in the name of father of petitioner no.1.
Petitioners again submitted the aforesaid documents before the Additional Collector but the Additional Collector without any application of mind held that Jamabandi created in 1987 in the name of father of the petitioner no.1 and the sale Patna High Court CWJC No.16985 of 2018 dt.13-09-2022 6/12 was not as per the guideline of the Revenue and Land Reforms Department. The Additional Collector came to the conclusion that Jamabandi was earlier created in the name of father of petitioner no.1 and petitioner nos.2 and 3. The Additional Collector cancelled Jamabandi No. 67/6 standing in the name of petitioner no.1. By order dated 19.05.2017, though the claim of the petitioners was rejected by the Additional Collector but he allowed the claim of Ram Ratan Singh and others who claimed settlement on the part of plot no.1712 considering the Compensation Case No. 273/23/53-54 and held that Ram Ratan Singh was the settlee by the same landlord and came in possession and recognized him as raiyat by the State of Bihar and he was paying rent.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the order dated 19.05.2017 passed by the Additional Collector in Jamabandi Cancellation Case No. 57-2016-17/109 of 2016-17 is no order in the eye of law and the same has been passed without considering the documents and in fact, there is no consideration of the documents produced by the petitioners and the Additional Collector in half-page order dated 19.05.2017 has taken note of the sale deed dated 18.07.1977 and rent receipt of 2014-15. He has not considered other documents which were Patna High Court CWJC No.16985 of 2018 dt.13-09-2022 7/12 brought on record by the petitioners as mentioned above.
It has also been contended by the petitioners that longstanding Jamabandi in the name of these petitioners since 1956 cannot be cancelled by the revenue authorities. For cancellation of longstanding Jamabandi, the State has to file a title suit in the competent Civil Court.
Petitioners have relied upon following judgments of this Court in the case of Yogendra Prasad Shukla @ Yogendra Vs. State of Bihar reported in 2008 (3) PLJR 395; Kamlesh Vs. The State of Bihar reported in 2008 (2) PLJR 466 and case of Ramnandan Singh Vs. The State of Bihar reported in 2015(1) PLJR 606.
The State has filed a cryptic counter affidavit and has not denied the statements made by the petitioners. The State has only narrated the facts of the case and in one paragraph has stated that the petitioners did not produce any documents in support of their claim over the land in question. The Additional Collector, Aurangabad after considering the entire facts and evidences available on record found that in view of the Resolution dated 11.11.2014, the petitioners do not come under the category of Chirbhog Raiyat and came to the conclusion that there is no legal evidence produced by the petitioners in Patna High Court CWJC No.16985 of 2018 dt.13-09-2022 8/12 support of the raiyati claim over the land in question.
The appeal preferred by the petitioners before the Collector, Aurangabad against the order dated 19.05.2017 was dismissed by the Collector on 30.12.2019. It is also submitted that the order dated 30.12.2019 was also no order in the eye of law as the case of the petitioners has not been dealt with properly and the documents which were produced by the petitioners have not been discussed by the Collector, who dismissed the appeal. He has merely narrated the submissions of the petitioners but there is no consideration of the of the documents of the petitioners.
The petitioners in their rejoinder have again reiterated the facts mentioned in the writ petition. He has also brought on record the Land Possession Certificate issued on 05.02.2015 in respect of Khata No. 224 Khesra No.1712 in favour of petitioner no.1.
I have heard Mr. Kamlendra Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Sajid Salim Khan, SC 25 assisted by Mr. Wasi Ahmad Khan, AC to SC 25 as also Dr. K.N. Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General for the Union of India.
Mr. Kamlendra Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the Patna High Court CWJC No.16985 of 2018 dt.13-09-2022 9/12 petitioners, has made following submissions:-
The order dated 19.05.2017 passed by the Additional Collector in Jamabandi Cancellation Case No.57 of 2016-17/ 109 of 2016-17 and the order dated 30.12.2019 passed by the Collector, Aurangabad in Jamabandi Cancellation Appeal No. 351 of 2017 are fit to be set aside. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the orders have been passed without application of mind; without considering the documents produced by the petitioners and without considering the law laid down by this Court.
This Court in the case of Nawal Kishori Devi & others Vs. The State of Bihar & others vide order dated 18.11.2013 passed in CWJC No. 4979 has held as follows:-
" In sofar as the issue of the right of ex- intermediary to settle the public land is concerned, the issue stands answered in the judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Musammat Husanbano (supra).
This brings this Court to the main issue raised by the petitioners questioning the action taken by the authorities in initiating proceeding for the cancellation of Jamabandi bearing Case No. 1 of 2004-05 and impugned at Annexure-1 to the writ proceedings. There cannot be a contest on the legal position that neither under the Bihar Tenants' Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973 nor under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, there is any provision for cancellation of Jamabandi. Although the Bihar Land Reforms Act in its Section 4 does provide for cancellation of settlement but Patna High Court CWJC No.16985 of 2018 dt.13-09-2022 10/12 that is distinct to a cancellation of Jamabandi and the manner is prescribed for such exercise. This issue came up for consideration as back as in the year 1978 when this Court in the case of Harihar Singh reported in 1978 BBCJ 323 held that the authorities have no jurisdiction to cancel the Jamabandi and remove the names of the settlee from the tenants register. A Division Division Bench of this Court in the case of Khiru Gope (supra) while taking note of the two earlier judgments of this Court reported 1978 BBCJ 323 (Harihar Singh vs The Additional Collector) and 1979 BBCJ 605 ( Jamaluddin Ahmad vs. S. D. O.) held that where the settlee claims settlement under a Hukumnama, there was no authority vested to the Collector to cancel the Jamabandi made in favour of a settlee from an ex-intermediary, the effect whereof would be to cancel the settlement by the ex-intermediary. The Jamabandi in the present case having been created pursuant to a registered settlement, certainly the action of the Collector in directing cancellation of the Jamabandi is in the teeth of the Division Bench pronouncements of this Court. The remedy for the State authorities, if any, certainly was not by way of executive action under the statutory powers rather rested before the civil court of competent jurisdiction for a proper declaration."
This Court has consistently held that power of the State for cancellation of Jamabandi cannot be exercised in casual manner and if the State challenges the correctness of the settlements and the entries in relation thereto, onus is entirely upon the State to prove that they are wrong.
In the case of Ramnandan Singh Vs. The State of Bihar (supra), this Court, while dealing with the provisions of Section 4(h) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, has held that Patna High Court CWJC No.16985 of 2018 dt.13-09-2022 11/12 if the State, for any reason, wants to challenge the authority or the title of any person based on settlement made by the ex- landlord then the only option left to the State is to approach the civil court for cancellation of Jamabandi whereas in the present case it is an admitted position that the land was settled by the ex-landlord in favour of the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners. The ex-landlord after vesting Zamindari, return of Jamabandi was filed and thereafter rent was accepted by the State and the State issued rent receipt and only when land was acquired for compensation, the Jamabandi was enquired into by an illegal order and in most arbitrary way Jamabandi was cancelled and the same order was affirmed by the Collector in the same casual manner.
In view of the discussions made above, this writ application succeeds and the order dated 19.05.2017 passed by the Additional Collector in Jamabandi Cancellation Case No.57 of 2016-17/ 109 of 2016-17 and the order dated 30.12.2019 passed by the Collector, Aurangabad in Jamabandi Cancellation Appeal No. 351 of 2017 are hereby set aside. The State will have a liberty to file a title suit if it challenges the settlement in favour of the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners and Jamabandi in their favour but mere filing of the title suit by the Patna High Court CWJC No.16985 of 2018 dt.13-09-2022 12/12 State will not deny the compensation amount which may be payable to the petitioners pursuant to the land having been acquired by the Railway.
This writ application is allowed with cost.
(Sandeep Kumar, J) BT/-
AFR AFR CAV DATE N.A. Uploading Date 17.11.2022 Transmission Date N.A.