Jharkhand High Court
Muni Devi vs The State Of Jharkhand; on 28 February, 2025
Author: Deepak Roshan
Bench: Deepak Roshan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No.6942 of 2023
-------
Muni Devi, aged about 44 years, wife of Krishan Murari
Choudhary, R/o Prabha Apartment, Lubi Circular Road,
P.O. & P.S. Barbadda, District Dhanbad. ...... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand;
2. The Secretary, Revenue, Registration and Land
Reforms Department, having Office at Project Building,
P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi
3. The Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, P.O & P.S
Dhanbad, District Dhanbad;
4. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Dhanbad, P.O &
P.S Dhanbad, District Dhanbad;
5. The Circle Officer, Govindpur Circle, P.O. Govindpur
P.S. Govindpur, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand;
6. The Sub Registrar, Sub Registry Office, Dhanbad,
having office at Court more, P.O & P.S Dhanbad, District
Dhanbad .... Respondents
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sidharth Sudhanshu, Adv.
: Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Adv.
For the Res-State : Mr. Mirnal Kanti Roy, G.A.-I
: Mr. Abhinay Kumar, AC to G.A.-I
-------
06/Dated:28.02.2025
1. The instant writ application has been preferred
by the petitioner for following relief:-
(a) For issuance of appropriate
writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) particularly in the
nature of certiorari for quashing the list of
prohibited land (Annexure 7) issued for
prohibition of registration of transfer of land,
which is uploaded on the website of the
Government of Jharkhand by The Revenue,
Registration and Land Reforms Department,
State of Jharkhand;
(b) For issuance of appropriate
writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) particularly in the
nature of mandamus commanding upon the
respondent not to refuse registration of the land
in question in the garb of showing the land in
question in prohibited list unilaterally prepared
by the respondents;
(c) For issuance of appropriate
writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) particularly in the
nature of mandamus commanding upon the
respondents not to harass the petitioner and not
let the petitioner to run from one office to
another without there being any fault on the
part of the petitioner and accept the sale deed
so presented for registration of transfer of land
in question by the respondent no. 6.
(d) For issuance of appropriate
writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) especially in the
nature of mandamus for directing the
respondents to take decision in terms of
provisions contained in Section 71 of
Registration Act, if the respondent is otherwise
refusing to register the transfer deed in respect
to the land in question so presented before him.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the land in
question amongst other belong to the khatiyani raiyat
namely Upay Pandey Digar and the legal heir of Upay
Pandey Digar have sold their land to petitioner situated
at Mouza Panduki, P.S. Govindpur, Mouza No. 90, New
Khata No. 203 (Old Khata No. 114), New Plot No. 42 (Old
Plot No. 3), area measuring 18 Decimals, New Plot No. 43
(Old Plot No. 3), area measuring 33 Decimals, New Plot
No. 44 (Old Plot No. 3), area measuring 7 Decimals, New
Plot No. 45 (Old Plot No. 3), area measuring 3 Decimals,
New Plot No. 25 (Old Plot No. 13), area measuring 25
Decimals, New Plot No. 89 (Old Plot No. 37), area
measuring 28.25 Decimals, New Plot No. 90 (Old Plot No.
40), area measuring 112 Decimals, New Plot No. 93 (Old
Plot No. 44), area measuring 35 Decimals, New Plot No.
157 (Old Plot No. 72, 73, 74, 2016), area measuring 113
Decimals through two registered sale deeds bearing Sale
Deed No. 1892/1665 dated 07.02.2011 and Sale Deed
No. 12986 dated 13.09.2011 on payment of entire
consideration amount.
Thereafter, the petitioner also purchased land
situated at Mouza Panduki, P.S.-Govindpur, Mouza No.
90, New Khata No. 203 (Old Khata No. 24), New Plot No.
426 (Old Plot No. 265), area measuring 14 Decimals, New
Plot No. 427 (Old Plot No. 265), area measuring 13
Decimals, New Plot No. 428 (Old Plot No. 265), area
measuring 13 Decimals, New Plot No. 429 (Old Plot No.
265), area measuring 14 Decimals through two registered
sale deeds bearing Sale Deed No. 2321/2052 dated
19.02.2010 and Sale Deed No. 2322/2053 dated
19.02.2010 from Rupesh Pandey and others
(descendants of Upay Pandey Digar) and thereafter
mutation was allowed in his favour vide order dated
28.09.2011 and he is paying rent regularly till the year
2020-21.
All of a sudden, without any rhyme and reason
and without issuing any notice, land of the petitioner was
included in the prohibited List and vide Annexure -7 his
land were kept in prohibited list of land which is also
been uploaded on the website of the State of Jharkhand
and therefore he is not able to sell his land. Hence this
writ application.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the core issue in the present writ application is covered
by the judgment dated 13th December, 2024 passed in
W.P.(C) No. 847 of 2023 (Brinda Devi Agarwal Vs. State of
Jharkhand). Learned counsel for the Respondents could
not dispute the aforesaid position.
4. Even otherwise, in view of the fact that the
respondent authorities are not vested in any law to
exercise any jurisdiction affecting the right, title and
interest of any individual. It is only the Civil Court of
competent jurisdiction, who will decide such issue.
Placing any property in prohibited list is a colourable
exercise of power and the State authorities cannot be the
judge of its own cause.
5. Therefore, for the reasons alike, the instant
writ application stands allowed and the concerned
respondent is directed to allow registration of land in
question without giving effect to prohibited list
(Annexure-7) issued by Revenue Department prohibiting
the transfer of land. Pending I.A.s, if any, also stand
closed.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
Fahim/-
