IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, C.J., RAJESH SHANKAR
Shiv Shankar Sharma, S/o. Sri Gautam Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand, through its Chief Secretary – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.)
1. This Public Interest Litigation is filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:-
(A) For the direction upon the respondent no. 6 Anti-Corruption Bureau to register FIR against these District Sub-registrars who have deliberately with a criminal motive just for earning an illegal money has contravened the directives of the Revenue Department and of the District Sub-registrar and have become carrier of illegal transaction of the government land and that all those lands whose transfer is prohibited even in the CNT Act also. And also submit the status report after custodial of these District Sub Registrars who are posted in various District Sub-Registrar office by the directives given by the DC, IG Registrar and the Revenue Secretary, they are indulging in mass corruption in transfer of the government land.
(B) For the direction upon the respondent no. 1 to file an affidavit before this Court explaining as to how much money these District Sub Registrar have earned while they transfer the land of khata no. 383 situated in Pundag area of Ranchi and even after repeated directions given by the Government these lands have been transferred to diffe


Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 is unconstitutional as it violates Articles 14 and 246 of the Constitution, invalidating related notifications.
Notification under S.22-A(2) of the Registration Act essential for prohibiting registration of documents concerning government land.
The constitutionality of Section 22A of the Registration Act, 1908 was upheld, establishing that legislative provisions to prevent fraudulent transfers are valid and necessary for public policy prote....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the refusal for registration of properties based on defective notifications under Section 22-A of the Registration Act was illegal, arbitrary,....
The court ruled that a notification inviting objections does not constitute a valid basis for refusing property registration under the Registration Act, emphasizing compliance with statutory provisio....
The court ruled that land cannot be classified as prohibited under Section 22-A without proper Gazette notification, allowing registration of sale deeds.
The court established that proper notifications and adherence to guidelines are essential for enforcing prohibitions on property registration under Section 22(A) of the Registration Act.
The District Collector is required to delete the Government lands assigned prior to 1954 from the purview of the provisions of section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, as per G.O.Ms.No.575, Revenu....
Section 22A(2) applies strictly to house sites in planning areas only; registering officers cannot infer conversion from plot size or boundaries.
The Sub-Registrar must register documents presented for registration unless legally prohibited, following the Registration Act's provisions.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.