Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13766 of 2008 ====================================================== Nathuni Bhar Son of Late Maniraj Bhar, resident of Village Hussepur Tola Bhagwanpur, PS Bhorey, District Gopalganj .... .... Petitioner 1. The State of Bihar 2. Bihar Bhoodan Yagna Committee, Congress Maidan, Kadamkuan, Versus Patna- 3 through its Chairman 3. Chairman, Bihar Bhoodan Yagna Committee, Congress Maidan, Kadam Kuan, Patna -4 4. Office Secretary, District Bhoodan Yagna Committee, Arar More, Gopalganj, PS and District Gopalganj 5. Rajendra Prasad 6. Awadesh Prasad – both sons of late Chokat Bhar, residents of Village Hussepur, Tola Bhagwanpur, PS Bhorey, District Gopalganj
Legal Reasoning
ground that the petitioner has approached this Court in the present proceeding assailing the impugned Praman Patra after unduly long delay and, therefore, according to him, on the ground of delay itself the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. However, he has not been able to bring on record any document showing cancellation of Praman Patra issued in favour of the petitioner earlier on 23.10.1957 vide Annexure-1. He has also not been able to show that an opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner by respondent no.3 before issuance of the impugned Praman Patra to the private respondents. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 2, 3 and 4 has very fairly conceded that no documents are available in the office of the Bihar Bhoodan Yagna Committee showing cancellation of Praman Patra issued to the petitioner with respect to lands under dispute as far back as in 1957. He has further conceded that there is no power vested in Bhoodan Yagna Committee for cancellation of Praman Patra issued earlier in favour of any person. According to him, that Patna High Court CWJC No.13766 of 2008 (4) dt.23-09-2013 3 power is vested only in the Revenue Officer as defined under the provisions of the Act. 6. After having heard the parties, this Court finds that the petitioner as also respondent no. 5 and 6 are poor persons and all of them are said to be landless. On the aforesaid ground, Praman Patra was issued to the petitioner in the year 1957 with respect to lands under dispute. But until and unless the Praman Patra once issued in favour of the petitioner is/was cancelled by the competent authority under the provisions of the Act, there was no occasion for issuance of fresh Praman Patra in favour of private respondent nos. 5 and 6. Learned counsel for Bhoodan Yagna Committee has submitted that there is no document available with the Committee showing initiation of any proceeding regarding cancellation of Praman Patra issued in favour of the petitioner in the year 1957. Further this Court finds that Bhoodan Yagna Committee and its functionaries are not vested with powers for cancellation of any Praman Patra issued in favour of a beneficiary. They can only make recommendation to the Revenue Officer in terms of Section 21 of the Act and only thereafter a final order can be passed. But these basic facts are completely lacking in the present proceeding. Admittedly, opportunity of hearing was not given to the petitioner by the respondent Bhoodan Yagna Committee before issuance of fresh Praman Patra in favour of respondent no. 5 and 6 with respect to the same plot of land, which was earlier allotted to /settled with the petitioner. That being the position, this Court has no option but to set aside the fresh Praman Patra dated 10.1.1977 (Annexure-2 series) issued in favour of respondent no. 5 and 6. However, that will not revive the Praman Patra issued in favour of the petitioner. The respondent Bhoodan Patna High Court CWJC No.13766 of 2008 (4) dt.23-09-2013 4 Yagna Committee will hold an enquiry in terms of Section 21 of the Act as to whether the petitioner has violated the terms and conditions of the Praman Patra issued to him on 23.10.1957 (Annexure-1). If it is found that the petitioner has violated the terms and conditions of the Praman Patra, then the respondent Bhoodan Yagna Committee shall make recommendation to the prescribed Revenue Officer for cancellation of Praman Patra issued to the petitioner on 23.10.1957, whereafter the prescribed Revenue Officer shall pass an appropriate final order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, besides others. If on conclusion of the proceeding the prescribed Revenue Officer comes to a conclusion that the Praman Patra issued to the petitioner is fit to be cancelled, then appropriate finding shall be recorded to that effect and final order shall be passed in accordance with the provisions of the Act, and thereafter steps shall be taken by the respondent Bhoodan Yagna Committee for issuance of fresh Praman Patra with respect to lands under dispute in favour of appropriate persons including respondent no. 5 and 6. 7. Respondent Bhoodan Yagna Committee is hereby directed to hold an enquiry and conclude the same with respect to allegation that the petitioner has violated the terms and conditions of Praman Patra expeditiously at an early date, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. 8. The writ petition stands finally disposed of with the observations and directions made above. mrl. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)
Arguments
.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey No.5 Mr. Suresh Prasad Bhakta For the State : Mr. Sanjay Prakash Verma, AC to GA 3 For Respondent no. 2 to 4 : Mr. Jai Vardhan Narayan Ms. Aishwarya Riti For Respondent no. 5 and 6 : Mr. Chandra Kant Mr. Subhash Patel ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 4 23-09-2013 Heard the parties. 2. The grievance of the petitioner in the present proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is that though he was granted Praman Patra (Certificate) as far back as on 23.10.1957 under the provisions of Bihar Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1954 (in short Act) with respect to a plot of land bearing Khesra no. 5894 area 1 acre 1 decimal, and he has been coming in possession over the same, yet without issuing any show cause notice to him and without passing any order cancelling the aforesaid Praman Patra, fresh Praman Patras have been issued on 10.1.1977 vide Annexure-2 series in favour of respondent no. 5 Patna High Court CWJC No.13766 of 2008 (4) dt.23-09-2013 2 and 6 separately settling 50 decimals of lands to each of them of the aforesaid plot bearing Khesra no. 5894, which had already been settled in favour of the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that issuance of the impugned Praman Patra dated 10.1.1977 in favour of respondent no. 5 and 6, as contained in Annexure-2 series, is wholly illegal and in violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, it is liable to be set aside by this Court. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 5 and 6 has opposed the prayer primarily on the