Nirmala Devi vs The State Of Bihar
2023 Latest Caselaw 546 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                        Letters Patent Appeal No.607 of 2018
                                         In
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13116 of 1992
     ======================================================

1. Nirmala Devi W/o Harbansh R/o Village and P.O. - Mathila Via, P.S. -

Koransaraiya, District - Buxar.

2. Shivji Singh @ Sheoji Singh

3. Satya Narain Singh

4. Sanjay Kumar Singh All S/o late Dadan Singh and Late Ramala Devi

5. Renu Devi

6. Sadhana Devi, Both D/o Late Dadan Singh and Late Ramala Devi Petitioner Nos. 2 to 6 are R/o Village and P.O. - Kopwa, P.S. Koransaraiya, District - Buxar, presently R/o Village - Niranjanpur, P.O. Diwan Ke Barkha Gaon, P.S. - Koransaraiya, District Buxar.

... ... Appellant/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The District Collector, Bhojpur.

4. Nagendra Singh S/o late Ram Subhag Singh

5. Binod Kumar Singh

6. Deshraj Singh

7. Hansraj Singh All S/o late Rudal Singh

8. Koshila Devi

9. Bibi Devi

10. Pinki Devi

11. Rani Devi All daughters of late Rudal Singh All R/o Village Niranjanpur, P.S. - Koransarai, District - Buxar.

12. Anil Singh

13. Krishna Singh

14. Vinod Singh

15. Bateshwar Singh

16. Sriman Singh @ Pahari Singh All S/o Nagendra Singh and late Kumaro Devi All R/o Village Niranjanpur, P.S. - Koransarai, District - Buxar.

17. Smt. Atwaro Devi W/o Sripati Ram

18. Sant Bilash Singh S/o Late Ramadhar Singh Both R/o Village Niranjanpur, P.O. Koransarai, District - Buxar.

19. Shankar Dayal Yadav S/o Shri Shri Rangila Yadav R/o Village Pipari, P.S. Koransarai, District - Buxar.

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

Patna High Court L.P.A No.607 of 2018 dt.01-02-2023

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Advocate Ms. Vagisha Pragya Vacaknavi, Advocate For the Respondent/s : None.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR)

Date : 01-02-2023

Heard Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, learned Advocate for

the appellants.

As noted in earlier orders, there is no appearance on

behalf of the respondents even though they have been served

notice.

The appellants herein are the descendants of one

Indrasana Kuer, the mother-in-law of the vendor of some of

the sale-deeds, which were executed in favour of third party

during the pendency of the consolidation proceedings. She

had approached the District Collector under Section 32 of the

Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of

Fragmentation Act, 1956 (hereinafter called the Act) for

declaring such sale-deeds to be null and void in view of the

bar for any transfer or alienation of any kind as provided

under Section 5 of the Act.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.607 of 2018 dt.01-02-2023

The Collector did not agree to the proposition of the

objector forcing a litigation ahead before the Bihar Land

Tribunal.

Before the Tribunal, the issue with respect to sale of

a property, which was under the consolidation operation, was

raised but the Tribunal found that the sale-deed had been

executed only after the Chaks were determined and the

principles were declared under Section 13 of the Act.

Precisely for this reason, no interference was made

by the Tribunal.

On similar set of grounds, the learned Single Judge

also refused to interfere with the orders passed by the

authorities below.

Mr. Binod Kumar Singh strenuously argued that in

the Full Bench decision of the Patna High Court in Panna

Devi Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. 2010(2) PLJR 1066

(FB), it has been conclusively held that the bar operates for

the period during which consolidation proceedings are

pending and that it binds all the parties.

There is no quarrel to this proposition of law. Patna High Court L.P.A No.607 of 2018 dt.01-02-2023

It may be noted that the Full Bench in this instance

was constituted for correcting an apparent error in the

judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Ram Raji

Sharma and Anr. Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. 2007(4)

PLJR 449, in which it was held that the transaction during the

period of operation would be void in so far as the

consolidation proceedings are concerned and not inter se the

parties to the transaction.

Since this was in derogation of the general line of

decision, a determination of the issue was required by a

Larger Bench. The Full Bench, referred to above, did not find

the proposition in Ram Raji Sharma (supra) to be correct and

therefore it was conclusively held that any such transaction

shall not only govern the consolidation proceedings but shall

also bind the parties to the transaction.

We have noticed that the learned Single Judge relied

upon Kamla Devi Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. 1998(3) All

PLR 142, where, taking into account the basic principle of the

constitutional right to property and the general practice of the

State of Bihar in not coming out with a notification of closure

of consolidation operations under Section 26-A of the Act, Patna High Court L.P.A No.607 of 2018 dt.01-02-2023

even when Chaks are determined, it was held that preventing

an owner of a property to sell it for such long time would only

be an unnecessary curb on his right to enjoy the property.

Merely because a formal notification under Section 26-A of

the Act has not been issued, that would not fetter the right of

the owner to alienate his property by different modes.

Taking this to be an unnecessary inconvenience on

the right of enjoyment of property and the right being

circumscribed only for the purposes of ease of consolidation

proceedings, it was conclusively held that if the Chaks and the

principle behind it is declared under Section 13 of the Act,

there shall be no embargo on the alienation of the property,

without the permission of the Collector and no bar under

Section 5 of the Act would get attracted for the Collector of

the district to pass any order of nullity under Section 32 of the

Act.

The extension of the bar beyond that stage, it was

observed, would not serve any purpose of the Act and,

therefore, would be an arbitrary restriction on a citizen's right.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.607 of 2018 dt.01-02-2023

We endorse the afore-noted principle and find that

the orders passed by the Tribunal and the learned Single Judge

are not fit to be interfered with.

At this stage, Mr. Binod Kumar Singh submits that

surprisingly, in the consolidation operations, the Chaks were

carved out in favour of the objector viz Late Ms. Indrasana

Kuer, the mother-in-law of the vendor.

If that be the case, the vendee does not get any Title

and if at all the appellants are aggrieved, they could approach

the competent civil court for redressal of their grievances.

Thus finding no fault with the order passed by the

learned Single Judge, we dismiss this appeal but without any

order as to costs.

                                                                   (Ashutosh Kumar, J)


                                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)


     kundan
AFR/NAFR                AFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          06.02.2023
Transmission Date