Advocates:
['R M SINGH', '', 'BIBHASH SINHA', 'V K ROY', 'S C LAND CEILING', '', 'INDRAJIT SINHA', 'KAUSHIK SARKHEL', 'KUMAR VIMAL', 'ROHIT ROY']

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P.(C) No. 4488 of 2006

-----

Nand Kishor Dubey, son of Late M.R. Dubey, resident of Village-

Pirra, P.O. & P.S.-Ratu, District-Ranchi

...

…

Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Ranchi

3. Circle Officer, Kanke, Ranchi

4. Sajjad Khan, son of Late Yasin Khan, resident of P.O. & P.S.-

Bariatu, District-Ranchi

...

…

Respondents

-----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

-----

For the Petitioner

: Mr. Sidhartha Roy, Advocate

For the State

: Mr. Sahil, JC to SC (L & C)

For Respondent No. 4

: Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate

Mr. Vipul Poddar, Advocate

-----

Order No. 07

Dated: 31.07.2017

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2.

The present writ petition has been filed challenging

the issuance of rent receipts for the land in question in favour of

one Karma Lohar.

3.

The factual matrix of the case as stated in the writ

petition is that 54 decimals of land under Plot No. 533, Khata No.

71, Village-Pirra was recorded in the name of Makeshwar Ram

Dubey in the khatiyan. The said land was registered in favour of

one Bucca Lohar as adhbataidar. After the abolition of jamindari,

the recorded raiyat took possession of the land from Bucca Lohar,

filed return and the rent was fixed in favour of Late Makeshawer

Ram Dubey in Case No. 1065 R-08 1953-56. Thereafter, the

recorded raiyat came in possession of the land in question and the

petitioner being the legal heir of said Late Makeshwar Ram Dubey

is in peaceful possession of the land in question since 1956. The

son of adhbataidar Karma Lohar filed an appeal being Appeal No.

11 R-15 1964-65 against the order of the Circle Officer before the

2

Additional Collector, Ranchi. The aforesaid appeal was rejected

vide order dated 01.03.1966 as not maintainable. The learned

counsel further submits that the respondent no. 4 has been

harassing the petitioner by repeatedly filing cases under Section

144 Cr.P.C. on frivolous grounds and the Sub-Divisional

Magistrate, Ranchi repeatedly intervened in the matter and

decided the case in favour of the petitioner. The respondent no. 4

also filed a title suit for the same land being Title Suit No. 188 of

2005 and the same is pending in the court of Munsif, Ranchi and

during pendency of the suit, the Circle Officer, without issuing any

notice or initiating any proceeding, issued rent receipts in favour

of Karma Lohar. The petitioner also came to know that the

successor of Karma Lohar by virtue of registered sale-deed dated

04.10.2004 sold the land in question in favour of respondent no.

4 and one Jahir Ansari. On the basis of the aforesaid facts, the

learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no.

3 may be restrained from issuing rent receipts in favour of Karma

Lohar.

4.

The learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 submits

that the respondent no. 4 has purchased the land in question by

the successor of Karma Lohar by virtue of sale-deed dated

04.10.2004 which was sold in favour of respondent no. 4 and one

Jahir Ansari. The learned counsel further submits that the

respondent no. 4 has already filed a suit for declaration of title

over the plot in question being Title Suit No. 188 of 2005 which is

pending in the court of Munsif, Ranchi and, therefore, the

respondent no. 4 is the lawful owner of the plot in question. The

respondent no. 3 has rightly not entertained the intervention of

the petitioner in the revenue records.

5.

The learned counsel for the respondent-State while

relying upon the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent

nos. 1 to 3 submits that the land of Village-Pirra, P.S.-Ranchi (now

3

Ratu), P.S. No.-93, Khata No.-71, Plot No. 533, Area-54 decimals

under Khewat No. 2/8 stands recorded in the name of Bucca

Lohar, S/o Charku Lohar as Kaimi. The name of the landlord as

mentioned in the Khatian