Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SANDEEP KUMAR, J.
Dhirendra Kumar Singh – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case Nos. 1597, 2245 of 2020, Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13688 of 2019
Decided On : 07-11-2022
Jamabandi - Land Dispute - The Bihar Right to Public Grievances Redressal Act, 2015 - Section 9 of the Bihar Mutation Act, 2011 - Rules 13 of the Bihar Mutation Rules, 2012
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the cancellation of Jamabandi in a summary proceeding based on the directions passed by the Commissioner, Munger Division, Munger. The land dispute involved multiple cases with similar nature and the petitioners claimed that the cancellation was done without proper notice and violated the principles of natural justice.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the authority had no jurisdiction to cancel the long-standing Jamabandi in a summary proceeding under the Bihar Right to Public Grievances Redressal Act, 2015. The court also highlighted the violation of the Bihar Mutation Act, 2011 and Rules 13 of the Bihar Mutation Rules, 2012. The court set aside the orders and directed the authorities to act in accordance with the law for restoration of the cancelled Jamabandi.
Issues: Jurisdiction of the authority under the Bihar Right to Public Grievances Redressal Act, 2015, violation of principles of natural justice, and non-compliance with the Bihar Mutation Act, 2011 and Rules 13 of the Bihar Mutation Rules, 2012.
Ratio Decidendi: The authority under the Bihar Right to Public Grievances Redressal Act, 2015 did not have the jurisdiction to cancel the Jamabandi in a summary proceeding. The cancellation violated the principles of natural justice and the provisions of the Bihar Mutation Act, 2011 and Rules 13 of the Bihar Mutation Rules, 2012.
Final Decision: The court set aside the orders and directed the authorities to act in accordance with the law for restoration of the cancelled Jamabandi.
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP KUMAR, J.
1. Heard Mr. P.N. Shahi, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners assisted by Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh, Advocate and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
Re: C.W.J.C. No. 1597 of 2020
2. This case has been preferred by the present petitioner challenging the order dated 30.01.2018 passed by the Public Officer, District Public Grievances Redressal Forum, Munger, by which cancellation of Jamabandi existing in the name of the present petitioner has been ordered with regard to Mauza-Binda Diyara, Tola-Mirza Bahiyar, Thana No. 386, Tauzi No. 1351, Khata No. 519.
3. The said application has been challenged stating that the entire cancellation has been done in a summary proceeding based on the directions passed by the Commissioner, Munger Division, Munger in BLDR Appeal No. 165 of 2012 dated 30.10.2013.
4. It is the case of the present petitioner that the land is situated in Mauza-Binda Diyara, Mirza Bahiyar, Thana No. 386, Tauzi No. 1531, Khata No. 519 and Jamabandi No. 19 of area 31 Acre and 87 decimal of land. In the records, the name of Late Deoki Nandan Prasad Singh has been recorded and the nature of land has been recorded as Gairmajarua Malguzar. It has been submitted that after the partition took place in the family of Late Babu Deoki Nandan Prasad Singh and the present petitioner got share somewhere between before 1955 and rents are being paid since long.
5. The petitioner further relied on the Khatiyani entry of Case No. 1 of 1934-35 and so far plot no. 521, 518 and 519 are concerned (Annexure-1,1/A,1/B,) and submitted that the Khatiyan has been prepared on the basis of possession and collection of Malguzari and the Khatiyan itself would show that the name of Late Deoki Nandan Prasad Singh has been recorded as Khewat No. 1 and description of the land as Gairmajarua but in the same, it has been recorded as Malguzari, meaning thereby that the land is in possession of Late Deoki Nandan Prasad Singh and Malguzari was being paid by the Jamindar, who was shown himself in possession and Jamabandi is existing since long.
6. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State stating therein that the nature of the land in question is Gairmajarua Kaishar-e-Hind land and there is finding given in BLDR Case No. 45 of 2011-12 (Amrendra Kumar Singh and Others vs. Amerika Singh and Others) in which the DCLR relied on the letter of Land Reforms Department, Patna bearing No. 808/Khas Mahal Policy/14/97-9087/R dated 21.07.1988 that land of Kaishar-e-Hind reveals that in Article 294-A of the Constitution of India, the land of Kaishar-e-Hind prior to implementation of the Constitution of India was of her majesty and after implementation of Constitution of India vested in Union of India or in the State and as per Kandika-2 of the said letter, there is specific direction that any settlement by the ex-landlord relating to Kaishar-e-Hind land should not be accepted.
7. It has also been urged/stated by the learned counsel for the respondents that the appeal preferred by the Amrendra Kumar Singh and Others in BLDR Case No. 165 of 2012 has been dismissed on 30.10.2013 and one case bearing BLT case No. 240 of 2014 has been preferred, which was also dismissed on 14.03.2018.
8. It has also been submitted by the State that thus the claim of the petitioner that in the name will not change the status of the land and the order dated 30.01.2018 passed by the District Public Grievances Redressal Forum is justified in the eye of law.
Re: C.W.J.C. No. 13688 of 2019
9. This case has been preferred by the present petitioner challenging the order dated 30.01.2018 passed by the Public Officer, District Public Grievances Redressal Forum, Munger, by which cancellation of Jamabandi existing in the name of the present petitioner has been ordered with regard to Jamabandi No. 20, existing in Mauza-Binda Diyara, Tola-Jhaua Bahiyar, Thana No. 386, Tauzi No. 1351, Jamabandi No. 20, Plot No. 345, 378, 394, 387, 388, Jamabandi No. 20 (Old) ,
The authority under the Bihar Right to Public Grievances Redressal Act, 2015 did not have the jurisdiction to cancel the long-standing Jamabandi in a summary proceeding and the cancellation violated ....
Long-standing Jamabandi cannot be cancelled in a summary proceeding and the DCLR has no jurisdiction to cancel the Jamabandi.
Government authorities can cancel Jamabandi if opened without jurisdiction or through fraudulent means, safeguarding public interest over erroneous administrative actions.
Long-standing Jamabandi cannot be cancelled in summary proceedings as it undermines previously established property rights without due process.
Orders concerning land ownership must adhere to procedural integrity and jurisdictional authority, especially in cases involving alleged fraud and non-disclosure of material facts.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
