Patna High Court - Orders
Jagjivan Ram vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 1 September, 2014
Author: Jyoti Saran
Bench: Jyoti Saran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1025 of 2013
======================================================
Jagjivan Ram S/O Late Nageshwar Ram R/O Village- Sisai, P.O.- Dhobani,
P.S.- Laoriya, District- West Champaran
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur
3. The Secretary Commissioner Office, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur
4. The District Magistrate District- West Champaran at Bettiah
5. The Circle Officer, Laoriya Block, District- West Champaran
6. Prasan Sah S/O Faudi Sah R/O Village- Sisai, P.O.- Dhobani, P.S.-
Laoriya, District- West Champaran
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamod Kumar Vidyarthi
For the Respondent/s : Mr. J.S. Arora
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN
ORAL ORDER
4 01-09-2014Heard Mr. Kamod Kumar Vidyarthi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and Mr. S. Paras Mani appearing for the respondent no. 6.
The petitioner has sought issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for commanding the respondents to restore the possession of the petitioner over a plot of land bearing Khata No. 106 / 5, Plot No. 22/11 having an area of 49 decimals situated in village Sisai, Block-Lauriya, District-West Champaran.
It is the case of the petitioner that following a declaration of surplus land belonging to the private respondents in a Ceiling proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 that a purcha was issued in the name of the father Patna High Court CWJC No.1025 of 2013 (4) dt.01-09-2014 2 of the petitioner namely Late Nageshwar Ram and other 37 persons in respect of 39 decimals of land so declared surplus in the proceedings.
It is the complaint of the petitioner that he has been dispossessed by the respondent no. 6 in the year 2008 and whereafter he has represented before the Circle Officer praying for restoration of the possession but to no avail and hence this writ petition.
A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the private respondents and in which it has been admitted that the land in question belonged to one Hareshwar Tiwary and in a ceiling proceeding bearing no. 5 of 1973-74 / 6 of 1979-80 the land in question was declared surplus and was distributed amongst the purcha dhari including the petitioner in the year 1982. It is stated that the land owner namely Hareshwar Tiwary questioned the order of the statutory authority under the Ceiling Act in CWJC No. 1168 of 1982 and when the matter was remitted for reconsideration. On being dissatisfied by the result, Land owner again moved through CWJC No. 4765 of 1993 which was allowed by judgment and order dated 20.5.1993 holding the said Hareshwar Tiwary entitled to further units. It is stated that following the order passed by this Court placed at Annexure-R/1 to the counter affidavit, that the matter was reconsidered and the Patna High Court CWJC No.1025 of 2013 (4) dt.01-09-2014 3 Additional Collector by order passed on 19.4.1994 dropped the ceiling proceeding while observing that the land held by the said Hareshwar Tiwary was within the ceiling limits. The order passed by the Additional Collector on 19.4.1994 is placed at Annexure- R/2. It is the stand of the private respondent that following the declaration in favour of the land holder as contained in Annexure- R/2, the purcha issued by the authorities to the petitioner and others was cancelled and which position is reflected in the letter of the Circle Officer dated 26.9.2000 placed at Annexure-R/3. The letter of the Circle Officer addressed to the District Magistrate, West Champaran also reflects that he had recommended for alternative allotment of plot to the purcha dharis. The fact remains that following the declaration by the statutory authorities the proceedings initiated under the Ceiling Act against Hareshwar Tiwary was dropped. It is thereafter that the land owner Hareshwar Tiwary sold a part of the land to the private respondent through a registered deed dated 20.3.2002 and whereafter he has taken possession of the land in question and which also stands mutated in his name. It is the stand of the private respondents that following the obstruction created by the purcha dharis he was to take recourse to the legal remedies but with Administrative support he has been able to obtain possession of the land in question.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1025 of 2013 (4) dt.01-09-2014 4
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and I have perused the materials on record. It is apparent from the record that the purcha issued in favour of the petitioner was following a declaration of the surplus land belonging to Hareshwar Tiwary and which ceiling proceeding were ultimately dropped following the order of this Court and the said Hareshwar Tiwary was held to possess land within the permissible limits and it is in consequence of such order that the purcha issued in favour of the purcha dhari was cancelled way back in the year 2000. Since the claim of the petitioner rests on the declaration of surplus land, the statutory authorities having held that the land owner did not possess any surplus land, it is a natural consequence that purcha issued in respect of such surplus land would become a nullity and has been rightly cancelled by the administrative authority.
No cause for interference is made out.
The writ petition is dismissed.
(Jyoti Saran, J) S.Sb/-
U T