JUDGMENT

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents through video conference.

2. The following reliefs as formulated by the petitioner have been claimed in the writ petition -

"(i) For issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus for giving a direction to respondent no.2 & 3 to make registration of sale deed for sale of the flat of the petitioner constructed over the land situated in Mouza Bodhgaya Thana No. 359, Khata No. 701, Khesara No. 138 Area 1.78 Acre, which has been constructed on the basis of development agreement made between petitioner and one Smt. Chanda Devi, who is owner of the land abovementioned.

(ii) For giving a direction to grant compensation to the petitioner for the loss incurred to him, due to illegal and arbitrary decision withholding the registration of flat of the petitioner by the respondent authorities without any basis.

(iii) Any other relief/reliefs which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper."

3. The short facts of the case according to the petitioner are that he entered into a development agreement on 16.07.2013 with (1) Smt. Chanda Devi, wife of Late Rajendra Prasad (2) Sri Vikram Kumar, son of Late Rejendra Prasad (3) Smt. Priti Kumari, daughter of Late Rajendra Prasad, wife of Sri Mahendra Kumar (4) Sri Bindi Kumar @ Priti Kumari and (5) Sri Gyani Kumari daughter of Late Rajendra Prasad with respect to the land situated at Mouza Bodhgaya, PS. Bodhgaya, District- Gaya, Thana No. 359, Khata No. 701 (new), Plot No. 138 (new) Area 14 Katha (19040 Sq. feet) for making construction of apartments. The land is raiyati land of Smt. Chanda Devi and her family Jamabandi stood in the name of her grand father-in-law, after whose demise the portion of land was given to Smt. Chanda Devi in whose favour, after family partition, jamabandi was created. The petitioner, a builder, has constructed amulti-storeyed building on the said land and started selling the flats falling to his share, through registered sale deeds. The petitioner submitted documents for registration along with challan dated 28.03.2018 in respect of one such flat in favour of Smt. Niti Sinha, wife of Sri Vinod Kumar Sinha. The District Sub-Registrar, Gaya (respondent no. 3) by his letter dated 17.04.2018 (Annexure-5) required a detailed enquiry and report from the Circle Officer, Bodh Gaya (respondent no. 6). Accordingly, verification was made and enquiry conducted through Anchal Amin and Karamchari, on the basis of which the Circle Officer, Bodh Gaya submitted a report in his letter no. 1220 dated 05.12.2018 specifically stating therein that the land in question is raiyati land of Smt. Chanda Devi. Again, the District Sub-Registrar, Gaya wrote to the Circle Officer seeking clarification with regard to restriction on registration by the District Magistrate, Gaya (respondent no. 2) on the ground that the computer chart indicated the said land stood in the name of Harendra Giri vide order reference 166/29.08.2012. In reply, the Circle Officer in his letter dated 25.01.2020 (Annexure-8) denied issuance of the said order 166 dated 29/08/2012 from that office.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the enquiry and verification and the consequent report of the Circle Officer as above with the categorical finding that the land in question was the raiyati land of Smt. Chanda Devi, there is no justification for the District Sub-Registrar, Gaya (respondent no. 3)to not register the sale deed presented for registration duly accompanied by the challan dated 28.03.2018. A representation to the Principal Secretary (Annexure-9) is claimed to have been filed by the petitioner but to no avail.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent-State appears and opposes the writ petition, submitting on the basis of the counter affidavit that the old C.S. Plot No. 96 under old C.S. Khata No. 151, measuring an area of 1.62 acres was recorded in the name of one Buddhan Gope. Thereafter, pursuant to Revisional Survey Khati