The State must obtain a decree in its favor from a civil court of competent jurisdiction to challenge the validity of a Jamabandi after a long period.

Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.

1. Heard parties. Petitioner challenges the order dated 25.9.2012/21.12.2012 passed in Miscellaneous Case No. 96/2009-10 by the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Siwan by which it has been held that Jamabandi of the petitioner is doubtful and there is apprehension of it being fraudulent, therefore, the demand of the petitioner for compensation for the alleged use of Plot No. 1682 appertaining to Khata No. 101, area about 9 katthas is unacceptable and further the Anchal Adhikari has been directed to make a detailed enquiry and, thereafter, take steps for cancellation of Jamabandi, which is running in the name of the petitioner. The petitioner has admittedly purchased the land through a registered sale deed dated 2.3.1977 from one Baiju Lal Prasad and thereafter, his Jamabandi No. 315 was created by the State of Bihar. Petitioner claims that the rent was being paid by him and receipt was being granted by the State authority. When 3 katthas and 5 Dhurs of land was being used for construction of a road then the petitioner approached this Court by filing C.W.J.C. No. 5779 of 2007 which was disposed of vide Annexure-4 dated 28.10.2009 granting liberty to the petitioner to file representation before the Collector, Siwan and status quo was directed to be maintained.

2. The Collector, Siwan has rejected the representation of the petitioner vide Annexure-8. One of the grounds for rejection which has been taken by the Collector is that the case of the petitioner before this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 5779 of 2007 was that ex-landlord had executed a registered Patta in favour of Ganga Tiwary in the year 1940 and the land was purchased from him by the ancestor of his vendor. However, before the Collector, the petitioner has changed the story and submitted that the settlement was through Sada Patta and not in favour of Ganga Tiwary rather it was in favour of one Motilal Sah from whom the ancestor of his vendor namely, Smt. Kunti Devi, wife of Chandrika Prasad purchased the land concerned through a registered deed on 21.12.1953, a copy of which has been appended as Annexure-9, i.e. well before vesting of Jamabandi in the year 1956. However, the Collector has questioned that how the name has now been changed from Ganga Tiwary to Motilal Sah. When the petitioner was directed to produce Sada Patta executed in the year 1940, he allegedly failed to produce the same. It is admitted position that after purchase of the land in the names of Smt. Kamli Devi, Kunti Devi and Sheo Dulari Devi, Jamabandi Nos. 92, 93 and 186 were created in their names which was never questioned by the State of Bihar on any earlier occasion. Thereafter, in the year 1977 by a registered sale deed, the petitioner has purchased the land from the son of Kunti Devi namely, Baju Lal Prasad, vide Annexure-10. After that also, the State accepted rent and was granting rent receipt but nothing was questioned. Now, when the petitioner has claimed that his land is being used for construction of a road then Sada Patta in the year 1940 is being questioned by the Collector. The petitioner has produced the sale deed executed in the year 1953 in which the vendor has disclosed that he was in possession of the land and is transferring title and possession in favour of the purchaser who paid Malgujari with respect to the Jamabandi concerned and got his name mutated in his records. In such a situation, when there is admitted long time possession and transfer through registered sale deed which was never questioned, that cannot be disbelieved and petitioner's claim cannot be ousted in a manner in which it has been done by the Collector while passing the impugned order.

3. There is second aspect of the matter. The Collector has come to the conclusion that people of the locality were using the plot as a 'Aam Rasta' therefore, they have some right and, thus, the road shall be constructed over it.

4. I completely fail to understand as to how such plea could be decided by the Co