Kedar Das vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 727 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                     Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4912 of 2018
     ======================================================

Kedar Das Son of Late Jhari Das Resident of Village - Srighana, P.S. - Suraj Garha, District - Munger.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate, Lakhisarai.

3. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Lakhisarai.

4. Smt. Gayatri Devi W/o Arjun Pandit resident of Village - Basudeopur, P.S. -

Suraj Garha, District Munger.

5. Nageshwar Das

6. Jagdish Das Both sons of Late Jhari Das Resident of Village - Srighana, P.S.

- Suraj Garha, District - Munger.

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

     For the Petitioner/s    :     Mr. Bijay Kumar Singh
                                   Mr.Vijay Kumar
     For the State           :     Mr. W. A. Khan, AC to SC 25
     Fror Respondent no. 4   :     Mr. Sanjeev Kumar
                                   Mr. Ritesh Kumar Narayan Singh

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 09-02-2023

The present writ application has been filed for quashing

of the order, dated 20.12.2017, passed by the Bihar Land Tribunal,

Patna, in B.L.T. Case No. 289 of 2017, whereby the Tribunal has

affirmed the order, dated 04.11.2016, passed by the Collector,

Lakhisarai, in Jamabandi Correction Appeal Case No. 85 of 1990-

91 (Munger)/14 of 1994-95 (Lakhisarai) and the order, dated

21.09.1990, passed by the D.C.L.R., Lakhisarai, in Jamabandi

Correction Case No. 13 of 1984-85. The petitioner has further

prayed for quashing of the correction slip issued by the Circle Patna High Court CWJC No.4912 of 2018 dt.09-02-2023

Officer, Surajgarha, vide memo no. 781, dated 06.07.2018,

whereby the Circle Officer has directed for issuance of rent

receipts in favour of respondent no. 4.

2. The recorded tenant sold the land in favour of the

father of the petitioner at Rs. 30/- by way of oral sale in the year

1950. Rent Fixation Case No. 50 of 1954-55, for 1.53 decimals of

land, was initiated and the Circle Officer fixed the rent of 1.53

decimals of land in favour of the petitioner's father and jamabandi

no. 364 was created. Thereafter, the petitioner started paying rent

to the State of Bihar, but in the year 1978, respondent nos. 4 to 6

purchased the land from the heirs of bataidari raiyat and thereafter,

correction of jamabandi case was filed by the private respondents,

which was allowed by the D.C.L.R., Lakhisarai, on 21.09.1990,

holding that oral sale is not permissible. The Collector, Lakhisarai

and the Tribunal affirmed the order passed by the D.C.L.R.,

Lakhisarai, on the same analogy.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that long

standing jamabandi is running in the name of the petitioner, which

cannot be interfered with by the Revenue Authorities and only the

Civil Court can exercise jurisdiction in this regard.

4. In support of his submission, learned Counsel relied

upon the decisions of the Supreme Court as well as this Court, in Patna High Court CWJC No.4912 of 2018 dt.09-02-2023

the cases of Sameer Singh and Another v. Abdul Rab and

Others, reported in 2015 (1) PLJR 64 (SC), Janki Singh and

Another v. The State of Bihar and Others, reported in 2016 (3)

PLJR 101, Maya Devi and Others v. The State of Bihar and

Others, reported in 2014 (3) PLJR 584, Rajendra Prasad v. The

State of Bihar and Others, reported in 2007 (Supp.) PLJR 272,

and Vijay Kumar Prasad v. The State of Bihar and Others,

reported in 2017 (1) PLJR 818.

5. Learned Counsel further submits that the vendors of

private respondents have got no right, title and interest because

they were heirs of bataidar and, therefore, sale deed executed in

favour of private respondents is not valid. He next submits that the

private respondents, instead of seeking mutation, have filed a case

for correction of jamabandi. There is difference between mutation

and correction of jamabandi having different connotation and the

three authorities have cancelled the jamabandi of the petitioner on

the ground that no document regarding the creation of jamabandi

in favour of the petitioner was brought on record by the petitioner.

He, referring to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the

respondents-State, submits that the State, in paragraph 4 of its

counter affidavit, has specifically stated that in the year 1954-55, a

rent fixation proceeding, vide Rent Fixation Case No. 50 of 1954- Patna High Court CWJC No.4912 of 2018 dt.09-02-2023

55, was initiated by the Circle Officer, Surajgarha, at the instance

of one Jhari Das, with respect to the land of mouza Srighana,

bearing khata no. 79, khesra no. 702, area 49 decimals, khesra 711,

area 39 decimals, khat6a no. 91, khesra no. 710 area 65 decimals

(total area being 1.53 acres) and accordingly Jamabandi No. 364

was created in the name of Jhari Das in Revenue Register-II of the

State of Bihar and since then, he is paying rent to the State of

Bihar. A copy of the Revenue Register - II showing creation of

Jamabandi No. 364 has also been annexed as Annexure-B to the

counter affidavit.

6. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent

no. 4 submits that no oral sale took place with regard to the subject

land and the petitioner never came in possession over the land. The

respondent no. 4 is paying rent to the State of Bihar and Jamabandi

No. 762 has been created in the name of respondent no. 4. Land

possession certificate has also been issued in her favour by the

authorities; whereas no chit of paper has been produced by the

petitioner regarding Rent Fixation Case No. 50 of 1954-55 nor any

paper regarding creation of jamabandi no. 364 has been produced

by the petitioner. He also submits that respondent nos. 4 to 6 have

not purchased the land from the heirs of bataidar, as contended by Patna High Court CWJC No.4912 of 2018 dt.09-02-2023

the petitioner; rather, the same has been purchased from the heirs

of the khatiyani raiyat.

7. Heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned.

8. The main question involved in this case is as to

whether long standing jamabandi, created in the year 1954-55, can

be cancelled or corrected by the revenue authorities.

9. From the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the

respondents-State, it transpires that the respondents-State has

accepted that Rent Fixation Case No. 50 of 1954-55 was initiated

at the instance of the father of the petitioner and Jamabandi No.

364 was created in his favour and in support of the submission,

copy of the Revenue Register - II showing creation of Jamabandi

No. 364 has been annexed by the respondents-State in its counter

affidavit. From perusal of the same, it appears that the contention

of the petitioner that jamabandi was created in his favour in the

year 1954-55 appears to be correct. There is no allegation either in

the counter affidavit filed by the State or the private respondent

that this jamabandi was obtained by the petitioner by playing

fraud.

10. This Court, in the cases of Vijay Kumar Prasad

(supra) and Maya Devi (supra), has held that long standing

jamabandi can only be cancelled by the civil court.

Patna High Court CWJC No.4912 of 2018 dt.09-02-2023

11. In view of the aforesaid discussion, on the fact as

well as on law, and the fact that jamabandi was created in favour

of the petitioner way back in the year 1954-55 and continued for a

long period of time, the order, dated 20.12.2017, passed by the

Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna, in B.L.T. Case No. 289 of 2017,

whereby the Tribunal has affirmed the order, dated 04.11.2016,

passed by the Collector, Lakhisarai, in Jamabandi Correction

Appeal Case No. 85 of 1990-91 (Munger)/14 of 1994-95

(Lakhisarai) and the order, dated 21.09.1990, passed by the

D.C.L.R., Lakhisarai, in Jamabandi Correction Case No. 13 of

1984-85, is set aside.

12. The respondent nos. 4 to 6, if so advised, may file a

suit against the petitioner for correction of jamabandi and/or

declaration of title.

13. In the result, this writ application is allowed.

14. There shall be no order as to costs.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/-

AFR/NAFR                         AFR
CAV DATE                         N/A
Uploading Date                09-02-2023
Transmission Date                N/A