Inclusion of land in a prohibited list without notice violates natural justice, affecting property rights and necessitating adherence to due process.

JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.

1. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner to quash the list of prohibited land (Annexure-12) issued by the Revenue Department, which prohibits the registration of transfer of land and to direct the respondents not to refuse the registration of the petitioner’s land transfer based on the unilaterally prepared prohibited list.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the land of petitioner is situated at Mauza Maheshpur, Mouza No.250, Thana Maheshpur, Khata No. 162, Dag (Plot) No. 475 area measuring 18 Katha 03 Dhurs in District Pakur. The land is settled under the name of Petitioner’s father through unregistered Bandobasti Parwana in 1945 and has also been paying rent and the latest rent receipt were issued in favour of petitioner till 31.07.2023. There have been objections regarding possession of land by petitioner however none fructified thereby cementing the claim of petitioner. Subsequently, without rhyme and reason and without issuing notice; the land of the petitioner was included in the Prohibited List prepared by the Government of Jharkhand which makes the land non-transferable in favour of others as such the petitioner is not able to transfer the land for his urgent money requirements. Hence, this writ application.

3. The issue in the present writ application is covered by the judgment dated 13th December, 2024 passed in W.P. (C) No. 847 of 2023 (Brinda Devi Agarwal Vs. State of Jharkhand). For brevity, relevant paragraph is quoted herein below:-

“9. Before delving deep into the matter, it would be appropriate to examine the important issues involved in the instant writ petition:

(I) Whether the entry of the land in the prohibited list of NGDRS has civil consequences?

(II) Whether the Respondent-State can put the land in the prohibited list under NGDRS without following due procedure of law and the principles of natural justice?

10. Having gone through the records of the case and after hearing the rival contention of the parties across the bar, it is an admitted fact that the land forming subject matter of the instant case was settled in the favour of the predecessor-in- interest of the Petitioner, namely Hari Prasad Agarwal in the year 1948 through a registered patta bearing number 1167 of 1948. The land was thereafter sold one to another individual namely Lalita Bhanote vide a registered sale deed dated 31st of March 1989. The Petitioner purchased the land in the year 2007 vide a registered sale deed dated 30th of November 2007. After the Petitioner purchased the land, she filed an application for mutation which was allowed vide order dated 24th of December 2007 and revenue rent receipts was issued in the favour of the Petitioner.

11. A bare perusal of the impugned order dated 11th of November 2022 will show that the land was marked as ‘suspicious’, and it was only on the basis of the same that the land forming subject matter of the instant writ petition was put in the prohibited list. The Respondent-State has not countered the fact that notices were not issued to the Petitioner prior to the jamabandi of the Petitioner being marked as ‘suspicious’ or before the land was entered in the prohibited list of NGDRS.

12. It is trite law that right to property and its enjoyment is not only a constitutional right but also a human right. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lachhman Dass vs. Jagat Ram and Ors.,2007 10 SCC 448 has held that the right to property is a constitutional right guaranteed under Article 300A of the Constitution of India and if there is any entity claiming a superior right, then such right has to be enforced in accordance with the procedure prescribed under law. The relevant portion of the judgement is as under:-

“16…His right, therefore, to own and possess the suit land could not have been taken away without giving him an opportunity of hearing in a matter of this nature. To hold property is a constitutional right in terms of Article 300A of the Constitutio