Jharkhand High Court
Vijay Kumar Ray vs District Registrar-Cum-Deputy ... on 15 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 3492 of 2020
With
I.A. No.1377 of 2021
Vijay Kumar Ray ..... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. District Registrar-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar.
2. Ganga Prasad Yadav. .... .... Respondents
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Onkar Nath Tiwary, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Praveen Akhouri, S.C. (Mines)-I
--------
04/15.03.2021 The present writ petition is taken up today through Video
conferencing.
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the entire
proceeding of Miscellaneous Complaint No.07 of 2020-21 initiated by the
District Registrar-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar-the respondent
no.1 on the complaint of the respondent no.2 for cancellation of sale
deed no.2020/MAD/102/BK1/88 dated 27th February, 2020 including
notice dated 3rd October, 2020 issued in the said case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no.1
in the capacity of District Registrar has no jurisdiction to initiate
proceeding for cancellation of sale deed under the provisions of the
Registration Act, 1908. Hence, initiation of proceeding in Misc. Complaint
No.07 of 2020-21 by the said respondent and issuance of notice dated 3rd
October, 2020 to the petitioner purportedly referring to Sections 82 and
83 of the Registration Act, 1908 as well as the circular contained in memo
no.930 dated 21st September, 2016 issued by the Department of
Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, are
illegal. It is further submitted that the Sections 82 and 83 of the
Registration Act, 1908 do not confer power to the District Registrar to
cancel a duly registered sale deed. Moreover, the notification dated 21st
September, 2016 issued by the State Government is also in the teeth of
the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Satya Pal Anand vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others reported
in (2016) 10 SCC, 767.
The petitioner has also preferred an interlocutory application being
I.A. No.1377 of 2021 for staying the further proceeding of Miscellaneous
Complaint No.07 of 2020-21 pending in the court of the respondent no.1
as well as staying the order dated 9th February, 2021 passed in the said
case by the said respondent.
Mr. Praveen Akhouri, learned S.C. (Mines)-I appearing on behalf of
the respondent no.1 though contests the argument of the learned
counsel for the petitioner on merit, yet he does not dispute the fact that
this Court has already passed interim orders by staying the similar
proceedings pending before the respondent no.1, while entertaining the
writ petitions being W.P.(C) Nos.3876 of 2020, 07 of 2021 and 515 of
2021. He, however, prays for three weeks' time to seek instruction and
file counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent no.1.
The time, as prayed for, is allowed.
Issue notice to the respondent no.2 under registered cover with
A/D as well as by ordinary process for which requisites etc. must be filed
within a period of one week.
Put up this case along with W.P.(C) No.3876 of 2020 and other
analogous cases.
In the meantime, further proceeding of Misc. Complaint No.07 of
2020-21 pending before the respondent no.1, shall remain stayed.
I.A. No.1377 of 2021 stands disposed of.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Rohit
