Back
2012 Supreme(Pat) 167
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SHEEMA ALI KHAN, J.
Shiv Shankar Pandey, Son of Late Rameshwar Pandey - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar & Ors. - Respondent/s
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4609 of 2011
Decided on : 30-01-2012
For the Petitioner:Mr. T.N. Maitin, Sr. Advocate Mr. Shashi Nath Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Apurva Kumar, A.C. to S.C. 10
The D.C.L.R. does not have the authority to interfere in matters falling under the acts listed in Schedule 1.
Headnote:
Land Dispute - Bihar Land Disputes Resolution Act, 2009 - Acts referred: The Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950; The Bihar Tenancy Act, 1885; The Bihar Privileged Persons Homestead Tenancy Act, 1947; The Bihar Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1954; The Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961; The Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 - The court discussed the jurisdiction of the D.C.L.R. under the Bihar Land Disputes Resolution Act, 2009 and the acts listed in Schedule 1 which bar the jurisdiction of the concerned authority. The court emphasized that the D.C.L.R. does not have the authority to interfere in matters falling under the acts listed in Schedule 1.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed an application to quash notices related to a land dispute. The dispute arose from a mistake in the plot number and encroachment on a public road.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dispute arose due to mistakes made by the Circle Officer and the petitioner. It concluded that the reference to the D.C.L.R. was unwarranted and quashed the notices, remanding the matter back to the Circle Officer for determination.
Issues: The main issue was whether the plot had been carved out of Plot No. 4634 or 4633, and if the petitioner had encroached upon a public road.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the D.C.L.R. does not have the authority to interfere in matters falling under the acts listed in Schedule 1. It also highlighted the mistakes made by the Circle Officer and the petitioner.
Final Decision: The court quashed the notices contained in Annexures 6 and 7, remanding the matter back to the Circle Officer for determination.
SHEEMA ALI KHAN
I.A. No. 308 of 2012
This interlocutory application has been filed for adding the Deputy Collector Land Reform, Sadar, Madhubani as respondent no. 5 and for quashing the notices contained in Annexures 6 and 7.
2. The interlocutory application is allowed and the petitioner is permitted to add the Deputy Collector Land Reform, Sadar, Madhubani as respondent no. 5 in this writ application.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
4. This application has been filed for quashing of the impugned notice dated 23.12.2010 (Annexure-1), passed in Encroachment Case No. 24(MU). The petitioner appeared and filed reply to the notice in which it has been stated that Plot No. 1853 appertaining to Khata No. 1158 has been carved out of old Plot No. 4633, measuring .33 decimals. Subsequently in the rejoinder application it has been stated on behalf of the petitioner that Plot No. 4633 has wrongly been typed in his petition rather it should be read as 4634. In any event on receipt of the show-cause the Circle Officer, Pandaul referred the mater to the D.C.L.R. under the Bihar Land Disputes Resolution Act, 2009. The petitioner has been noticed by the D.C.L.R. vide Annexures 6 and 7.
5. This notice is under challenge before this Court.
6. The reference made by the Circle Officer, Pandaul to the D.C.L.R. is on the basis of the fact that Plot No. 4633 is recorded as “Gair Majarua Aam Rasta” and as such, it is said that the petitioner has encroached upon the “Aam Rasta”. To substantiate the claim that Plot No. 1853 has not been carved out of Old Plot No. 4633, counsel for the petitioner refers to annexures 8 and 9.
7. Annexure-8 is the Purcha which indicates that Plot No. 1853 has been carved out of part of Old Plot No. 4634; whereas Annexure-9 the Khatiyan indicates that Plot No. 4634 is recorded in the name of the ancestors of the petitioner. From the above two documents it would prima facie appear that Plot No. 4634 is not a public road. The boundary to the petitioner’s Plot No. 4634 has been shown as North-Road, East and West- Tij Narayan Singh and on the South-Road. By the aforesaid Khatiyan, the petitioner purports to support his case to say that the petitioner had not under any circumstances encroached upon the public road.
8. Counsel for the petitioner has challenged the issuance of Annexures 6 and 7 on the ground that the D.C.L.R. does not have the jurisdiction to resolve the dispute as indicated aforesaid under the Bihar Land Disputes Resolution Act, 2009. Referring to sub sections 2 and 3 of section 4 which reads as follows:-
(2) The Competent Authority shall not have jurisdiction to review or reopen any finally concluded and adjudicated proceeding under any of the Acts contained in Schedule-1. The Competent Authority shall exercise his authority for resolving the dispute brought before him on the basis of any final order passed by any of the authorities empowered to do so in the Acts contained in Schedule-1 of this Act.
(3) The Competent Authority shall not have jurisdiction to adjudicate any fresh rights of allottee/settlee or a raiyat which is not yet determined and is required to be determined in accordance with provisions contained in any of the Acts contained in Schedule-1.
Provided that where rights of allottee/settlee or raiyat are already determined under any of the Acts contained in Schedule-1, the Competent Authority shall have jurisdiction to entertain cases appertaining to matters enumerated in sub-section (1). Schedule 1 refers to the acts which bars the jurisdiction of the concerned authority which are as follows:
1. The Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950
2. The Bihar Tenancy Act, 1885
3. The Bihar Privileged Persons Homestead Tenancy Act, 1947
4. The Bihar Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1954
5. The Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961
6. The Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956
10. Th
