The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No. 302 of 2023 ------ 1. Hridayanand Prasad, S/o Late Suraj Prasad @ Suraj Prasad Sahu, aged about-60 years, resident of Village-Belauti, P.O. & P.S. – Sahpur, District- Bhojpur (Bihar) 2. Ramji Sah, Son of Late Krishna Prasad Sah, aged about-76 years, resident of Village- Belauti, P.O. & P.S.- Sahpur, District- Bhojpur (Bihar) 3. Gupteshwar Sah, Son of Sri Gopal Sah, aged about-76 years, resident of village- Sahjauli, P.O. & P.S.- Sahpur, District-Bhojpur (Bihar) 1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Chief Secretary, Government of .... ... Appellants / Petitioners Versus Jharkhand, Ranchi 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. The Commissioner, South Chhota Nagpur Division, Ranchi 4. The Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga, Jharkhand 5. The Director, Land Records and Measurements, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 6. The Deputy Commissioner, Land Reforms Lohardaga, Jharkhand … … Respondents / Respondents ----- CORAM: HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
Legal Reasoning
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR For the Appellants For the Respondents -------- : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, Advocate : Mrs. Rahul Kamlesh, A.C. to S.C.-IV -------- Order No. 05 / Dated: 6th March, 2024 Suraj Prasad @ Suraj Prasad Sahu, Ramji Sah and Gupteshwar Sah came before this Court with the following prayers; the (i) “For issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ/order/direction setting aside the proceeding instituted by the Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga for settlement of lands being part of a total area of 64 acres of Gair-Majarua Malik land pertaining to Plot No. 54, Khata No. 168, Thana Lohardaga (No. 130) of Village Kisko in the District of Lohardaga in Jharkhand which was settled among others in the name of the Petitioners in the year 1951 by Ranchi Jamindari Ltd; (ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction commanding upon the Respondent Authorities to take appropriate steps for removal of the encroachments/illegal settlements made in favour of several persons/institutions who have illegally acquired possession over the land belonging to the Petitioners behind their back either in the garb of the proceedings for settlement of the land with them or in anticipation of the settlement being made in their favour or in the alternative issue appropriate directions to the Respondents to pay adequate compensation to the petitioners for the said lands calculated on the basis of the current market value of the said land. 2 L.P.A. No. 302 of 2023 the issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction (iii) For restraining the Respondent Authorities form taking any further steps the direction of settlement of the land mentioned above in any person or institution during the pendency of the instant case.” 2.
Decision
The writ petition was dismissed by an order dated 2nd February, 2023 with a liberty to the appellants to approach the Deputy Commissioner at Lohardaga to seek name of the persons in whose favour the property in question has been settled. 3. Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellants produced rent receipts and other documents to support their claim that Suraj Prasad has right, title and interest over 19.90 acres land comprised under Plot No. 54/7 and Plot No. 54/4; Late Krishna Prasad had rights over 19.90 acres land, comprised under Plot No. 54/9 and Plot No. 54/5 and; 23 acres land comprised under Plot No. 54/1 and 54/3 belonged to Gopal Sah. 4. The appellants pleaded before the writ Court that Ranchi Jamindari Limited which acquired the subject properties made settlements in favour of Suraj Prasad who is the father of appellant No.1, Krishna Prasad Sah who is the father of appellant No. 2 and Gopal Prasad who is the father of appellant No. 3. On coming into force of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, returns were filed in the name of the fathers of the appellants as Raiyats of Ranchi Jamindari Limited. Notwithstanding that, the respondents were trying to make settlements in favour of other persons of the subject lands which are in their possession. According to the appellants, the subject lands originally belonged to Maharana Pratap Uday Nath Shahdeo and were part of his Jagir since 1918 and transferred to Ranchi Zamindari Limited. 5. Before the writ Court, the respondents took a stand that the appellants were not in possession of the subject properties of the following descriptions: Sl. No. Name of the Sanstha Khata Plot 01. 02. 03. 04. 05. S.S. High School Kanya Ucha Vidyalaya, Kisko Aadiwasi Aawasiya Ucha Vidyalaya, Kisko Inter-College Kisko Kasturba Gandhi School, Kisko 168 168 168 168 168 Rakwa (in acre) 5.50 5.50 5.50 54 54 54 54 54 Total 6.50 400 27 Acres 3 L.P.A. No. 302 of 2023 6. The materials on record indicate that the appellants had knowledge about proposed settlement in favour of S.S. High School, Kanya Ucha Vidyalaya, Kisko, Aadiwasi Aawasiya Ucha Vidyalaya, Kisko, Inter- College Kisko and Kasturba Gandhi School, Kisko. It further appears that Ramji Prasad, Suraj Prasad and Gopal Prasad took a plea that on account of family conditions they could not obtain rent receipts after 1954. According to the appellants, the nature of the subject land is Gair-Majarua Malik. 7. In the background of the aforementioned facts, a question about right, title and possession of the appellants over the subject properties shall arise. The issue whether the subject properties were owned by Maharana Pratap Uday Nath Shahdeo and transferred in favour of Ranchi Jamindari Limited or that there were settlements in the name of fathers of the appellants shall necessarily require oral and documentary evidence and a decision in this regard can only be rendered by a civil Court of competent jurisdiction. In fact, the prayer made by the appellants before the writ Court was not maintainable inasmuch as no material was produced before the writ Court to challenge the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner for settlement of lands comprised under Plot No.54 within Khata No. 168 of Thana-Lohardaga in village-Kisko. The writ Court in exercise of the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India shall not decide claim of a person regarding his right, title and interest over a landed property merely on the basis of affidavits of the parties. 8. Therefore, L.P.A. No. 302 of 2023 is dismissed, with liberty to the appellants to approach the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction for a declaration as regards their right, title and interest over the subject properties. D.S./J.Minj (Navneet Kumar, J.) (Shree Chandrashekhar, A.C.J.)