The State Of Jharkhand & Others vs Kusumlata Devi & Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 2938 Jhar

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
               (Letters Patent Appellate Jurisdiction)
                          L.P.A. No. 58 of 2019

The State of Jharkhand & others                              ...... Appellants
                              Versus
Kusumlata Devi & others                                    ...... Respondents

                                with
L.P.A. No. 266 of 2019, L.P.A. No. 288 of 2019, L.P.A. No. 289 of 2019,
L.P.A. No. 290 of 2019, L.P.A. No. 291 of 2019, L.P.A. No. 292 of 2019,
L.P.A. No. 295 of 2019, L.P.A. No. 296 of 2019, L.P.A. No. 396 of 2019,
L.P.A. No. 397 of 2019, L.P.A. No. 399 of 2019 and L.P.A. No. 402 of 2019

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA

For the Appellant(s)      : Mr. Piyush Chitresh, AC to AG
For the Respondents       : Mr. Vineet Prakash, Advocate
For the Intervenor        : Mr. Ashutosh Prasad, Advocate
                                   ---------

Order No. 17 /Dated: 2nd August 2022

I.A. No. 6509 of 2022 in L.P.A. No. 58 of 2019 The affidavit dated 28th July 2022 filed by the Circle Officer, Bargai, Ranchi and what Mr. Piyush Chitresh, the learned AC to the learned Advocate General submits make an interesting disclosure - how mechanical and arbitrary an exercise of power can be.

2. In the affidavit dated 28th July 2022, the Circle Officer, Bargai, Ranchi, has stated that the list containing description of the prohibited lands published on 19th June 2018 invited several objections from various persons for exclusion of their property from the said list and after scrutinizing the objections so made some lands were deleted from the list of prohibited lands. It is further stated that a revised list was published and uploaded on NGDRS Portal and the letter dated 19th January 2021 was written by the Circle Officer, Bargai, Ranchi to the Deputy Commissioner in this regard.

3. We may indicate that this is the letter through which the revised list containing prohibited properties tabulated across 20 pages was sent to the Deputy Commissioner, which according to the Society was not reflected in NGDRS Portal.

4. The aforesaid revised list does not include property of the Society but the said property has been "locked" for any transaction.

5. Mr. Piyush Chitresh, the learned AC to the learned Advocate General refers to paragraph nos. 5 to 7 of the affidavit dated 28 th July 2022 which read as under:

"5. That it is stated that initially a list of prohibited land was published on 19.06.2018 by the respondent authorities indicating therein the nature, dimension and other details of land which were prohibited/restricted the details such as (Anchal name, Khatta No., P.S. Mouza No., Plot No., Area etc.) was reflected in the said list.

6. That thereafter several objections was received by the respondent authorities from various persons for exclusion of their property from the said prohibited list. That after receiving of the objection applications the respondent authorities scrutinized the same and certain lands were removed from the said lists (Unlocked) and thereafter a revised list was published by the respondent authorities in the NGDRS Portal by the respondent authorities.

7. That thereafter the letter dated 19.01.2021, was issued by the Circle Officer, Badgain, Ranchi informing the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi about the uploading of the prohibited/restricted list in the NGDRS Portal."

6. Mr. Piyush Chitresh, the learned AC to the learned Advocate General submits that since the land comprised under Plot No. 602, Khata No. 139 is recorded as GM lands the property of the Society has not been "unlocked" on NGDRS Portal.

7. To recapitulate, on a glance at the various documents produced by the Society which included judgments of the Courts including the Privy Council and the report prepared by Circle Officer, Bargai, Ranchi, this Court on 27th July 2022 observed that the right, title and interest of the Society over its property cannot be doubted.

8. In the context of the aforesaid order, we find that the affidavit dated 28th July 2022 filed by the Circle Officer, Bargai, Ranchi is conveniently silent as regards property of the Society.

9. The Society purchased 8.18 acres land through registered sale deed dated 26th April 1988 and after due enquiry name of the Society was recorded in the revenue records vide Mutation Case No. 3137R27/1988-89 and it started paying rent to the State. Later on, when the aforesaid lands belonging to the Society were put under restricted category, upon objections raised by the Society a comprehensive enquiry was conducted in the matter

which is reflected in the order dated 1 st December 2017 passed in Misc. Case No. 03/2017-18 vide annexure D. In the said order, there is a specific mention of Registration of Patta No. 5092 of 1943, Partition Suit No. 196 of 1946 and issuance of land revenue receipts continuously since 1966-67.

10. Notwithstanding the above, the Society was constrained to approach this Court because a list of restricted/prohibited lands was uploaded on NGDRS Portal which included the aforesaid property of the Society. As would appear from the affidavit of the Circle Officer, Bargai, Ranchi dated 28th July 2022, after enquiry a revised list was prepared in which property of the Society has not been included as the same has been found owned and possessed by the Society and others and, therefore, deleted from the list of restricted/prohibited lands.

11. Still, it is stated that the property of the Society has not been "unlocked" on the NGDRS Portal because in the Revisional Survey Record of Rights the lands comprised under Plot No. 602, Khata No. 139 are recorded as GM lands.

12. The Society has produced copies of the judgments passed by the Special Subordinate Judge, Ranchi and the Privy Council to demonstrate that Maharaja of Chotanagpur gave a patta in favour of Surujnath Ohdar in village Buti as "Jagir" through a deed registered on 23rd October 1906 before Sub-registrar, Ranchi which included Plot No. 602, Khata No. 139, Mauza Buti. Later on, the entire "Jagir" properties were mortgaged to Rai Saheb Ganpat Rai son of Chuni Lal by Bhuneshwar Nath Ohdar, who was the elder son of Surujnath Ohdar. Thereafter, Mortgage Suit No. 19 of 1932 was instituted by Rai Saheb Ganpat Rai against Bhuneshwar Nath Ohdar for recovery of money and the money decree passed in his favour was put on execution in Execution Case No. 3 of 1934 in which the entire "Jagir" properties were put on auction sale. There is also a reference of litigation between Rai Saheb Ganpat Rai and legal heirs of Surujnath Ohdar vide Title Suit No. 49 of 1934 (copy attached) and compromise between the parties, a reference of which is recorded in the report from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council dated 19th April 1944 at page 56 of the present application. We find that the entire "Jagir" lands in village Buti (now called Booty) were sold to Mahesh Choudhary and others through Kebala dated 24 th July 1943.

The vendors of the Society were purchasers of "Jagir" lands. Some are legal heirs of Bhuneshwar Nath Ohdar who after the "Jagir" lands were sold in Court auction sale again purchased the said properties after a compromise between the parties (recorded in the order of the Privy Council).

13. It is unbelievable that ignoring everything, as recorded above, a submission has been made that the lands belonging to the Society are recorded as GM lands in the Revisional Survey Record of Rights and, therefore, the said property has been "locked" on NGDRS Portal.

14. Plain and simple, this is arbitrary exercise of powers in locking the aforesaid property of the Society even though after proper verification and scrutiny of the records, as admitted by the Circle Officer, Bargai, Ranchi in the affidavit dated 28th July 2022, the said property has been deleted from the list of restricted/prohibited lands. An entry in the revenue records by no stretch of imagination can override or nullify judicial orders and auction sale by the Court and, therefore, we would put the controversy at rest holding that there cannot be even an iota of doubt as regards right, title and ownership of the Society over 8.18 acres land comprised in Plot No. 602, Khata No. 139, Mauza Buti.

15. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi is directed to unlock the aforesaid property admeasuring 8.18 acres comprised in Plot No. 602, Khata No. 139, Mauza Buti forthwith. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi is further directed to ensure that his direction(s) in compliance of the order of this Court is communicated to the Registering Authority forthwith.

16. I.A. No. 6509 of 2022 is disposed of.

L.P.A. No. 58 of 2019 with analogous matters

17. Post these matters on 24th August 2022 to be taken up as the first matter.

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)

(Ratnaker Bhengra, J.) RKM