Madan Prasad Mahato, aged about 65 years, S/o Late Sukhdeo Mahato, resident of –Village v. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The State of Jharkhand The Deputy
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (LETTERS APPELLATE JURISDICTION) L.P.A. No. 146 of 2024 Madan Prasad Mahato, aged about 65 years, S/o Late Sukhdeo Mahato, resident of –Village –Kurmidih, P.O.-Kalyanpur, P.S.-Barwadda, District- … … Appellant/Petitioner Dhanbad Versus 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The State of Jharkhand The Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, P.O., P.S. and District-Dhanbad The Additional Collector, Dhanbad, P.O., P.S. and District-Dhanbad The Sub-Divisional Officer, Dhanbad, P.O., P.S. and District-Dhanbad The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Dhanbad, P.O., P.S. and District- Dhanbad The Circle Officer, Dhanbad, P.O., P.S. and District-Dhanbad The Municipal Corporation, Dhanbad through its Chief Executive Officer, Dhanbad, P.O., P.S. and District-Dhanbad Dhiren Chandra Mahato, S/o Late Sukhdeo Mahato, resident of – Village –Kurmidih, P.O.-Kalyanpur, P.S.-Barwadda, District-Dhanbad … … Respondents … … Proforma Respondents ………………….
Legal Reasoning
CORAM:HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR For the Petitioner(s) : For the Resp. No. 1 to 6 : : For the Resp. No. 7 …………………. Mr. Kaustav Roy, Advocate Ms. Surabhi, AC to AAG-II Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Mr. Ankit Vishal, Advocate ………………… 24th June 2024 Per, Shree Chandrashekhar,A.C. J. The appellant, namely, Madan Prasad Mahato is aggrieved by the decision rendered in W.P. (C) No. 5302 of 2021. 2. Taking note of pendency of the civil suit filed by the appellant, the writ Court dismissed W.P. (C) No. 5302 of 2021 observing as under: “4. When the civil suit is pending, no direction can be given by this Court to issue rent receipt in favour of the petitioner. An order can be passed by this Court in respect of the mutation and issuance of rent receipt only after appropriate decision by the civil court in respect of the right, title interest o the parties. Thus, no positive order can be passed in favour of the petitioner. It is made clear that once civil suit is decided by the competent court of civil jurisdiction, the respondent State will take action in terms of the judgment passed by the civil court.” 3. In this Letters Patent Appeal, the appellant has set up a ground that in view of the order passed by the Circle Officer under Section 87 of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 (in short, „CNT Act‟) the Circle Officer had no jurisdiction to hold that rent receipt can be issued only for a part of the property comprised under Khata No. 266, Plot No. 757 measuring about 2.33 acres.Ms. Surabhi, the learned State counsel and Mr. Indrajit Sinha, the learned counsel who appears for the Dhanbad Municipal Corporation have raised an objection on the ground that in Original Suit No. 173 of 2021 the appellant has made a similar prayer for issuing rent receipts for the subject property. 4. The powers of the Circle Officer are provided under the Bihar Tenant‟s Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973 with a view to maintain up to date records ofthe holding of raiyats in the State of Bihar (now State of Jharkhand) and the matters connected therewith. Under Section 3, the Circle Officer (AnchalAdhikari) is required to prepare and maintain continuous Khatian, Tenants‟ Ledger Register and village Maps. Section 12 provides that the persons who are claiming any interest by virtue of an order,or intestate or testamentary succession, transfer, exchange, agreement, settlement, lease, mortgage, gift etc. shall file an application before the Circle Officer for mutation of their name in respect of that particular holding or part thereof. Section 14 lays down the procedure how the Circle Officer should deal with the applications under Sections 11 and 12 or on a report under Section 13. It provides that the Circle Officer shall start a mutation proceeding and after entering the same in the mutation case register which shall be maintained in the prescribed form should cause an enquiry as deemed necessary. Sub-section 2 to section 14 enjoins upon the Circle Officer to issue a general notice and also to give notice to the parties concerned to file objection, if any, within 15 days. The Circle Officer shall also give reasonable opportunity to them to adduce evidence. 2 LPA No. 146 of 2024 5. By now this is too well settled that the mutation proceedings are fiscal proceedings and the authority in exercise of the statutory powers cannot decide title of any party.Where a dispute as regards right, title and interest over the landed property arises the proper course of action for the mutation authority shall be to relegate the parties to the civil Court for a decision. In “Nirman Singh and others v. Lal RudraPartab Narain Singh and others”AIR 1926 PC 100 the Privy Council observed as under: “The perusal by their Lordships of the judgment of the Court of theJudicial Commissioner of Oudh leads their Lordships to think thatit is to a great degree based on the mischievous but persistent errorthat the proceedings for the mutation of names are judicialproceedings in which the title to and the proprietary rights in immovable property are determined. They are nothing of the kind,as has been pointed out times innumerable by the JudicialCommittee. They are much more in the nature of fiscal inquiriesinstituted in the interest of the State for the purpose of ascertainingwhich of the several claimants for the occupation of certaindenominations of immovable property may be put into occupationof it with the greater confidence that the revenue for it will bepaid.” 6. The law laid down in “Nirman Singh”seems to have been applied in “Suraj Bhan v. Financial Commr.” (2007) 6 SCC 186wherein the Hon‟ble Supreme Court held as under: “9. … It is well settled that an entry in revenue records does notconfer title on a person whose name appears in record-of-rights. It issettled law that entries in the revenue records or jamabandi have only“fiscal purpose” i.e. payment of land revenue, and no ownership isconferred on the basis of such entries. So far as title to the property isconcerned, it can only be decided by a competent civil court(vide Jattu Ram v. Hakam Singh). ….” 7. This is not in dispute that the Revenue Officer passed an order under Section 87 of the CNT Act holding that the subject property comprised under Khata No. 266 of Plot No. 757within Mauza Nawadih No. 2 in the district of Dhanbad does not belong to the Government of Jharkhand. The order dated 25th July 2012 passed by the Revenue Officer was not put to challenge either by the State of Jharkhand or the Dhanbad Municipal Corporation by filing an Appeal under sub-section 2 to Section 87 or a Revision Petition under Section 89 of the CNT Act and while so a prima facie inference can be drawn that the father of the appellant acquired valid 3 LPA No. 146 of 2024 right, title and interest over the subject property. 8. Therefore, this Letters Patent Appeal is allowedwith a direction to the Circle Officer (Anchal Adhikari), Dhanbad to issue rent receipt in the name of the appellant for the subject lands measuring about 2.33 acres. 9. L.P.A. No. 146 of 2024 is allowed. (Shree Chandrashekhar, A.C.J.) (Navneet Kumar, J.) Basant B/S.Das 4 LPA No. 146 of 2024