SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Jhk) 214

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Rajesh Shankar, J.
Shyam Sundar Ram @ Shyam Sunder Ram - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms and ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 6546 of 2024
Decided On : 10-02-2025


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate Mrs. Shilpi Sandil Gadodia, Advocate Mr. K. Hari, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, A.C. to A.G.

The court maintains that previous legal judgments affirming land ownership must be respected, and the status quo should be upheld while disputes are adjudicated.

Headnote:(A) Land Reform Laws - Settlement of Land - The petitioner claims lawful title and peaceful possession of land settled by the Ex-Landlord via 'Hukumnama' dated 17.03.1952, and challenges subsequent cancellation of his 'Jamabandi' and dispossession. Court acknowledges earlier judgments affirming petitioner's title and orders status quo pending further proceedings. (Paras 1-9)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - The court exercises its writ jurisdiction to ensure that lawful possession is maintained pending resolution of disputes regarding land title and settlement initiated by the State. (Paras 4-9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner asserts his ownership and possession of land since a settlement by the Ex-Landlord in 1952, contesting a later cancellation by a Deputy Collector in 1981 and supporting his claim with earlier judicial affirmations.

Findings of Court:
The court recognized the previous legal affirmations of the petitioner’s title and directed status quo over the land pending resolution.

Issues: The main issues were the legitimacy of the State’s action in initiating a new settlement case and respect for previous judgments affirming the petitioner’s ownership.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized maintaining the status quo as necessary to uphold previous legal determinations while addressing the ongoing disputes regarding land title.

Result: Notice issued; status quo to be maintained.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's claim of possession and legal rights. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. challenge to previous judgments not affecting current rights. (Para 4)
3. notice and procedure for case continuation. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. maintenance of status quo during proceedings. (Para 8 , 9)

ORDER:

Rajesh Shankar, J.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has the lawful right and possession over the land in question, the details of which have been given in paragraph-8 of the writ petition.

2. It is further submitted that pursuant to the settlement of land in question in favour of the petitioner by the Ex-Landlord vide “Hukumnama” dated 17.03.1952, he was all along in peaceful possession as rightful owner and rent in respect of the said land was also paid. However, after lapse of 17-18 years, Misc. Case No. 11 of 1981-82 was initiated for cancelling the “Jamabandi” running in the name of the petitioner and vide ex- parte order dated 02.04.1981, the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Mahagama, cancelled the said Jamabandi running in the name of the petitioner and dispossessed him from the land in question. Being aggrieved with the said order, the petitioner filed Title Suit No. 01 of 1983 in the court of learned In-charge Officer-II, Dumka, District- Godda seeking declaration of his right, title and interest over the land in question and also for recovery of possession. The said title suit was allowed vide judgment dated 25.05.1995 (decree signed on 27.05.1995) declaring the title of the petitioner over the land in question.

3. It is also submitted that pursuant to passing of the aforesaid judgment passed in Title Suit No. 01 of 1983, a “Basgadi” order dated 19.06.1995 was duly issued by the learned court of In-charge Officer, Dumka, pursuant to which the petitioner was put in possession of the land in question.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the judgment passed in Title Suit No. 01 of 1983 was challenged by the then State of Bihar and Others in Title Appeal No. 06 of 1995 in the court of learned Commissioner, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka, however the said appeal was dismissed vide order dated 29.03.2005 affirming the order passed in Title Suit No. 01 of 1983. Irrespective of the said fact, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mahagama (the respondent no. 3), vide impugned order dated 03.09.2024, has initiated Doubtful Settlement Case No. 01 of 2024 and has referred the matter to the Deputy Commissioner, Godda (the respondent no. 2) for further action in this regard. Under the said compelling circumstance, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

5. Issue notice.

6. Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, learned A.C. to A.G., appears and waives notice on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 4.

7. Issue notice to the respondent nos. 5 to 10 under registered cover with A/D as well as through ordinary process for which requisites etc. must be filed by 19.02.2025.

8. Put up this case after six weeks under appropriate heading.

9. In the meantime, the parties shall maintain status-quo as existing today over the land in question.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top