The court affirmed that the Deputy Commissioner's sanction for land transfer under the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act complied with statutory requirements, dismissing the petitioner's claims of illegal transfer and jurisdictional failures.

JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the Petitioner praying therein for following reliefs :-

(a) That Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to cancel the map sanctioned by the respondent No-3 for construction of multistoried building over the tribal Kaimi/Raiyati land bearing Khata No. 7, Plot No-19, measuring area 80 (eighty) decimals and plot No. 20 measuring area 92 (ninety two) decimals total area 1.72 acres situated at Village- Gari, Anchal- Bargai, P.S -Sadar, District- Ranchi which is in possession of the present tribal petitioner and the said land was transferred illegally under Section 49 CNT Act in the name of the respondent No. 6 vide sale deed dated 16.03.1965 without payment of full consideration amount under permission of the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi which is wholly without jurisdiction and the said permission vide Misc. Case No. 103 R 8 II of 1964-65 is/was totally contrary to Section 49 (a) & (b) of the CNT Act.

(b) holding and declaring that not for any industrial purposes or for any other purposes the State Government by ratification had declared to be subsidiary thereto or for access to land used or required for any such purpose and hence the Deputy Commissioner has/had no jurisdiction of sanction for transfer in absence of the ratification by the State Government under section 49(1)(a) & (b) of the CNT Act.

(c) holding and declaring that the use of land for the purpose of mining or for any other purposes the State Government had not notified the said land to be subsidiary thereto or for access to land used or required for any such purpose and hence the Deputy Commissioner has/had no jurisdiction of sanction for transfer in absence of the notification.

3. The brief facts of the case as per the pleadings in the writ petition is that the land appertaining to Khata No-7, Plot No-19, measuring area 80 (eighty) decimals and Plot No-20 measuring are 92 (ninety-two) decimals i.e. total 1.72 acres situated at Mouza- Gari, Anchal Bargai, District- Ranchi was recorded as Kaimi/Raiyati in the name of Etwa Oraon in the Revisional survey record of right “Bakabze” son of Shanicharwa Oraon and Bisu Oraon, respectively.

The Petitioner has been paying rent and the State is issuing rent receipts regularly and has been in peaceful possession over the land. However, the Respondent Nos. 4 & 5 suddenly came over the land in the beginning of month of March, 2024 and started construction work. Later, the Petitioner learnt that the Respondent Nos. 4 & 5 got sanctioned the map for multistoried building by the Respondent No. 2 against which he represented to him on 11.12.2023, 01.04.2024 and 02.04.2024 and served copy to the Respondent No. 2 but no response had come from their side at all. Hence, this writ application.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that as per Section 49 (2) of the Chotta Nagpur Tenancy Act (hereinafter to be referred as CNT Act), therein the word ‘shall’ is used which shows mandatory that the land can be used for that purpose for which it was transferred and not for any other purpose.

He further submits that the land is being used for construction of multistoried apartment by Developer which is completely impermissible as per Section 49 (2) of CNT Act because the so called permission was granted by the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi for the purpose of opening a shoe factory but there is no recital of starting a shoe factory in the sale deed; rather the recitals are like a sale of general land viz. the transferee may use