Harbans Singh Alag vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.

Instant writ application has been filed for an issuance of appropriate writ / writs, direction / directions, order / orders in the nature of Certiorari for

quashing order dated 19th March, 2010 (Annexure-6) passed by learned Additional Collector, Dhanbad in Misc. Case No.03/07-08 whereby and

whereunder the learned Additional Collector, Dhanbad has cancelled the Jamabandi of the petitioner being Jamabandi No.504 with regard to his

validly purchased land vide registered deed being part of Plot No.1611 under Khata No.102 situated at Govindpur, Post Office and Police Station-

Govindpur, District-Dhanbad.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the land in question belonged to Satya Narayan Singh who was in possession

of the land and paying revenue rent to the State Government thereafter it was sold to Nanku Sao in the year 1960-61 and Jamabandi was created in

his name. Nanku Sao also paid rent to the State Government. It is further submitted that Nanku Sao sold the land under Plot No.1611 under Khata

No.102 area 33 decimal situated at Govindpur, Dhanbad in favour of this petitioner and Basant Singh through a registered sale deed no.184 dated 4th

January, 1967. Thereafter, this petitioner came in possession of the land and accordingly his name was mutated and Jamabandi No.504 was created

and he also used to pay revenue to the State Government. It is also submitted that an Encroachment Case No.2(iii) of 1993-94 was started against this

petitioner but the Circle Officer found the possession of the land by the petitioner on 41 decimals of land and encroachment case was dropped vide

order dated 3rd October, 1993. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that all of a sudden, on the application of some of the villagers, a

report was called for from Halka Karamchari and Circle Officer, and thereafter, notice was issued to the petitioner and file was placed before

Additional Collector, Dhanbad. This petitioner has filed his show-cause before the Additional Collector, Dhanbad who in terms of order dated 19th

March, 2010 ordered for cancellation of Jamabandi of the petitioner. It is also submitted that aggrieved by the said order, this petitioner has

approached this Court. It is further submitted that in a summary proceeding, a Jamabandi cannot be cancelled when the petitioner was having

possession of the land and was paying rent to the State Government.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the respondents submitted that an inquiry was conducted on the complaint of villagers and it was found

that Jamabandi No.504 in respect of Gairabad Khas land bearing Plot No.1161 under Khata No.102 was existing without any proper and valid order

of any competent authority. It is further submitted that the Additional Collector, Dhanbad vide Misc. Case No.03/07-08 after providing opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner cancelled the Jamabandi vide order dated 19th March, 2010 which was also confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner,

Dhanbad. Learned counsel for the respondents also submitted that Additional Collector, Dhanbad has held that prima facie Jamabandi opened relating

to the land in question was found suspicious and doubtful. It was also not proved before that court that how a Gairabad land was allotted in favour of

Nanku Sao from which this petitioner is claiming transfer of land. Even the Jamabandi No.504 was also found illegal and in that view the court of

Additional Collector, Dhanbad recommended for cancellation of illegal Jamabandi.

Considering the above submissions of the parties and on perusal of the papers attached with this writ application, it appears that court of Additional

Collector, Dhanbad has exercised his power under Land Reforms Act, 1950 and as per departmental letter No.914/RA dated 9th December, 2008, the

power is vested with the Collector for cancellation of illegal Jamabandi and exercising that power when the petitioner could not demonstrated the

opening of Jamabandi in the name of Nanku Sao and others from which he was claiming land in question, therefore, it is a disputed question of fact

which cannot be adjudicated in the writ jurisdiction. The impugned order clearly shows that Jamabandi is being cancelled as it was created without any

valid papers.

In this circumstances, instant writ application is dismissed.