Dr.Bijay Kr.Sharma And Ors vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 2685 Patna

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
               Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8182 of 2001
======================================================

1 (a) Dr. Bijay Kumar Sharma, S/o Late Bishwambhar Kumar Sharma, R/o M.P. Sinha Road, P.O. + P.S. KADAMKUAN Town + District- Patna.

(b) Dr. Smt. Archana Kiran W/o Late Chandra Baleshwar Choudhary, R/o Village + P.O. Dimha, P.S. via Abiya Bazar, District- Bhagalpur

(c) Dr. Ranjana Mishra W/o Dr. Krishna Kumar Mishra, R/o Village Banni, P.O. Nagra, District- Saran, presently residing at Road No. 3 Juran Chapra, Town + District- Muzaffarpur.

(d) Dr. Smt. Rashmi Rekha, W/o Sri Vishwamohan Sharma, R/o Roop Bhawan, Pili Kothi, Village- Vilaspur, P.O. Hari Nagar, District- West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reform.

2. The Collector, Patna.

3. The Additional Collector Revenue, Patna Sadar, Patna.

4. The Circle Officer, Patna Sadar, Patna.

5. The Additional Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Old Secretariat, P.S. Secretariat Town + Dist- Patna.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh, AC to SC-18 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA CAV JUDGMENT Date : 10-05-2022

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

counsel for the respondents.

The writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India has been filed for quashing the order dated 20.06.2001

(Annexure-4) passed by the Collector, Patna (respondent no. 2)

whereby and whereunder the permanent lease deed of the

petitioners have been cancelled and has resumed the land in

question including the structures standing thereupon belonging to Patna High Court CWJC No.8182 of 2001 dt. 10-05-2022

the petitioners; further directed to the petitioners to handover the

said land with structures to the Circle Officer, Sadar, Patna

(respondent no. 4) by 02.07.2001.

Briefly stated the facts of the case as stated in the writ

petition that 7 katha, 12 dhurs and 9 dhurkies piece of land was

permanent leased out to Smt. Radha Rani Devi permanently from

generation to generation with full rights of transfer and peaceful

enjoyment without any interruption or disturbances by the lessor

and was allowed to errect building in accordance with the plans and

specification approved by the Municipality. The lessee after the

grant of permanent lease from generation to generation

constructed a house on the land in question for residential purpose.

The said Smt. Radha Rani Devi along with her husband Sri Narendra

Chandra Ganguli sold the lease hold land along with all the

buildings and structures to Smt. Ratan Kumari Sharma (mother of

the petitioners) by a registered sale deed dated 31.05.1944 taken in

the name of Sri Shyam Sunder Thakur own brother of the husband

of the Smt. Ratan Kumari Sharma, who subsequently by a registered

deed of Ekrarnama Ladavi dated 26.04.1958 admitted the purchase

made by and payment of consideration money by Smt. Ratan

Kumari Sharma who came in possession of the said land and house

and her name recorded in the Municipal Record.

In the year 1965, the mother of the petitioners

demolished the old dilapidated structures and constructed a new Patna High Court CWJC No.8182 of 2001 dt. 10-05-2022

double storied house over the land in question in accordance with

the map and plan sanctioned by the Patna Improvement Trust in

Case No. 26671962. On 25.06.2001 the mother of the petitioners

received a copy of order dated 20.06.2001 from the Collector, Patna

asking her why the lease of the land in question should not be

cancelled for violated the terms and conditions of the lease

agreement and the Collector, Patna has directed the Circle Officer to

take possession of the said land and structure standing thereon.

Thereafter on 30.06.2001 the petitioner was served with a copy of

memo no. 1320 dated 29.06.2001 issued by the Circle Officer, Sadar,

Patna asking her to handover the land with structures by

02.07.2001.

The Collector having not found reply to the show cause

satisfactory and recommended cancellation of the lease agreement.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

submits that the action of the respondent authority is wholly

unsustainable in law on the ground that there is no specific

provision for direct resumption under the lease agreement and

resumption according to Rule 21 of the Khas Mahal Manual can be

made only for public purposes and according to Rule 22 of the Khas

Mahal Manual, the Collector can take steps or direct possession of

the property in question only under the order of a competent civil

court.

Patna High Court CWJC No.8182 of 2001 dt. 10-05-2022

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the

respondents stating therein that as per Clause 6 of the Agreement

the lessee will not use the said plot for any commercial gains except

with the consent of the lessor. Clause 7 of the Agreement reveals if

any breach or non-observance of any clause shall allow the lessor to

annul the lease and take over the land in question after serving

notice to the lessee.

In the year 1996 in course of physical inspection of the

land in question, it was found that the lessee has violating the terms

and conditions of the agreement. Accordingly the petitioner was

given notice vide letter no. 641 dated 23.02.1996. The lessee gave

their reply to the show cause notice stating therein that they had

not violated any terms and conditions of the lease agreement.

The respondents recommended for the annulment of

lease in question vide letter no. 694 dated 02.05.1997 to the

Department of Revenue, Government of Bihar, Patna. The

Department of Revenue, Government of Bihar, Patna vide letter no.

91 dated 12.04.2001 has approved the recommendation and lastly

the department accepted the recommendation with a direction to

resume the land in question.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners

submits that lease in question being perpetual lease cannot be

subject to any interference by the State. The lease in question has

created a vested legal right in the lease holders to the exclusion of Patna High Court CWJC No.8182 of 2001 dt. 10-05-2022

others and the contractual obligation casted on the parties to the

lessee would bind the parties untill the lease is determined by the

competent forum (Civil Court).

Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his

submissions relied upon the following judgments :

(i) Shri Sanjay Singh Vs. Patna Municipal

Corporation reported in 2021 (1) BLJ 5.

(ii) Uday Sinha and others Vs. The State of

Bihar and others, reported in 2021 (5) BLJ 517.

(iii) Khas Mahal Citizen Welfare Society Vs.

The State of Bihar and others, reported in 2016

(1) PLJR 277.

Learned counsel for the petitioners have also submitted

that the aforesaid judgments rendered by a Coordinate Bench of

this Court has also been upheld by a Division Bench in the case of

The State of Bihar and others Vs. Khas Mahal Citizen Welfare

Society reported in 2017(3) PLJR 662. Learned counsel for the

petitioners further submits that the aforesaid judgment rendered

by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Khas Mahal Citizen

Welfare Society (supra) has also been upheld by a judgment

rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of The

State of Bihar and others Vs. Khas Mahal Citizen Welfare

Society reported in 2019 (1) PLJR 628 (SC).

Patna High Court CWJC No.8182 of 2001 dt. 10-05-2022

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits merely by an

administrative/executive order, lease deed in question can neither

be cancelled nor possession of the land in question can be resumed

unilaterally and the respondents are required to take recourse to

the due process of law under the Rule 21 and 22 of the Khas Mahal

Mannual by invoking the jurisdiction of the competent civil court by

filing appropriate suit and not otherwise. Learned counsel for the

petitioners further submits that the Collector, Patna has cancelled

the lease deeds in question and directed for resumption of the

possession of the land in question, which is contrary to the law laid

down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Express

Newspapers Private Limited and others Vs. Union of India and

others, reported in AIR 1986 SC 872 as also contrary to the law

laid down by this Court in a judgment in the case of The Gait Public

Library and Institute Vs. The State of Bihar and others,

reported in 1995 (1) PLJR 585.

Learned counsel for the State is also not in a position to

contest the stand in view of the judicial pronouncement noted

above and fairly submits that the present writ petition is squarely

covered by the judgments rendered by this Court in the case of (i)

Shri Sanjay Singh Vs. Patna Municipal Corporation reported in

2021 (1) BLJ 5, (ii) Uday Sinha and others Vs. The State of

Bihar and others, reported in 2021 (5) BLJ 517,(iii) Khas

Mahal Citizen Welfare Society Vs. The State of Bihar and others, Patna High Court CWJC No.8182 of 2001 dt. 10-05-2022

reported in 2016 (1) PLJR 277 and the same has also upheld by

the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of The State of

Bihar and others Vs. Khas Mahal Citizen Welfare Society

reported in 2017(3) PLJR 662.

For the reasons aforementioned, the order dated

20.06.2001 (Annexure-4) passed by the Collector, Patna cannot be

upheld and is accordingly quashed.

The writ petition is allowed.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//-

AFR/NAFR              NAFR
CAV DATE              N.A.
Uploading Date        10.05.2022
Transmission Date     N.A.