Patna High Court - Orders
Mohammad Ibrahim & Anr vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 1 August, 2017
Author: Ahsanuddin Amanullah
Bench: Ahsanuddin Amanullah
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12002 of 2016
======================================================
1. Mohammad Ibrahim S/o - Late Faizul Haque.
2. Md. Rizwan Alam S/o - Late Md. Salauddin. Both residents of Mohalla
- Barki Singhi, P.S. - Town Ara, District - Bhojpur.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Collector, Bhojpur.
2. Nagar Nigam Municipal Corporation, through its president, Ara
Bhojpur.
3. Officer Incharge P.S. Town Ara, Bhojpur.
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.
For the State : Mr. Sita Ram Yadav, G.P. 16
For the Ara Municipal Corporation : Mr. Bishwa Bibhuti Kumar
Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN
AMANULLAH
ORAL ORDER
5 01-08-2017Learned counsel for the petitioners, State as well as the respondent no. 2 have assisted the Court.
2. Pursuant to order dated 24.07.2017, the Collector, Bhojpur is present in Court. The Municipal Commissioner, Ara Municipal Corporation is also present.
3. A show cause has been filed on behalf of the Collector, Bhojpur tendering unconditional and unqualified apology. However, in the supplementary affidavit filed on his Patna High Court CWJC No.12002 of 2016 (5) dt.01-08-2017 2/6 behalf, a categorical statement has been made that the lands in question are registered in the name of Most. Hamidan wife of Sheikh Khuda Baksha and Sheikh Maula Baksha son of Sheikh Asgar Ali and further that the petitioner no. 1 is the descendent of the Khatiani raiyat. However, with regard to the land receipt issued, there is some controversy in receipt dated 01.07.2002 as it has not been issued from the office of the Circle Officer, Ara Sadar whereas the subsequent receipts dated 23.12.2015 and 22.07.2016, are accepted to have been issued by the Rajaswa Karmchari. In view of such dispute, where on the one hand, the petitioners assert that on their portion they are continuing in possession and whatever land has been used, either for dumping by the Ara Municipal Corporation or for settlement, does not include their portion of the land and the fact that the Ara Municipal Corporation, by way of a late knee-jerk reaction, to counter the claim of the petitioners in the present writ application has filed a suit for declaration of title over the lands in question. In the opinion of the Court, the true picture on the ground needs to be brought on record. It is only the statement on behalf of the Ara Municipal Corporation that they are in possession and there is counter statement by the writ petitioners that they are continuing in possession. However, one thing does go in favour Patna High Court CWJC No.12002 of 2016 (5) dt.01-08-2017 3/6 of the petitioners i.e., all the lands being registered in the name of the ancestor of the petitioners and also as per the stand taken before the Court today, both by learned counsel appearing for the State as well as the Collector, Bhojpur himself that they have no records with regard to the lands in question having being acquired, which is contrary to the stand reflected from the records of the Ara Municipal Corporation. Thus, at present, when the stand of the State authorities including the Collector, Bhojpur is not that records have been destroyed but categorical that no such records relating to acquisition of the lands in question for the Ara Municipal Corporation are on record, the entry in the records of the Ara Municipal Corporation being without any supporting basis, which is a requirement in law that there was a proper proceeding under the Land Acquisition Act leading to lands being formally acquired and given in possession of the Ara Municipal Corporation, it would not lie in the mouth of the Ara Municipal Corporation, which is an instrumentality of the State and also state under Article 12 of the Constitution of India, to take a stand that because they are in possession, the matter cannot be looked into any further. The Constitution does not contemplate such highhanded and arbitrary stand by the State or its instrumentalities which in fact amounts to an admission on the Patna High Court CWJC No.12002 of 2016 (5) dt.01-08-2017 4/6 part of the State instrumentality that they may not have any legal right over a land but because they have somehow come in possession, they shall now let go of the same. The State and its instrumentalities have to play fair and the act of the State cannot be that of a common man where he breaks a law and takes forcible possession of land not belonging to him and later asserts that because he is in possession, the title of the land stands transferred to him. In the present case, where the petitioners assert that the Khatiani records being maintained by the Revenue authorities discloses the name of their ancestor and the land raiyati, and the same not having been changed in the Government records and further that the lands in question which are part of the larger chunk have always been in their possession, the matter requires deeper investigation. On a direct query to the Collector, Bhojpur that if the lands had been acquired for the Ara Municipal Corporation, he being the authority, who would have done so and in his records neither there being any reference nor the name of the ancestor of the petitioners having been changed, was reflective of the fact that no such proceeding or acquisition ever took place, the answer is in the affirmative.
4. Mr. Bishwa Bibhuti Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Ara Municipal Corporation stated that since the Patna High Court CWJC No.12002 of 2016 (5) dt.01-08-2017 5/6 Municipal Corporation has possession over the land in question for the last many years, it has the right to proceed in the matter. It was further submitted that since the Ara Municipal Corporation does not have title over the land, a title suit being Title Suit No. 408 of 2017 has been filed before the Sub Judge, Ara.
5. Thus, in the considered opinion of the Court, enquiry is required to be conducted and a report submitted to the Court.
6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he has not been able to to through the contexts of the pleadings filed today and thus prays for a short adjournment to enable him, if required, to file an appropriate rejoinder.
7. In the aforesaid background, before taking a final view in the matter, as prayed for by learned counsel for the petitioners, the matter be listed on 17th August, 2017, retaining its position. The Court would take a call with regard to the show cause of the Collector, Bhojpur on the next date. However, his personal appearance stands dispensed with.
8. On the next date, the Circle Officer, Ara Sadar and the Municipal Commissioner, Ara Municipal Corporation Patna High Court CWJC No.12002 of 2016 (5) dt.01-08-2017 6/6 shall be present in Court.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar U