Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 27 (PAT)

Jai Mangal Singh @ Gopalji v. State Of Bihar

2003-01-09

AFTAB ALAM

body2003
Judgment 1. Pursuant to this Courts order, dated 20.12.2002 the Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, the Collector and the Addl. Collector, West Champaran, Bettiah are present. The Collector is represented by Mr. Ram Balak Mahto, Senior Advocate. 2. At the out set, the Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar expressed deep regrets over the actions of the Collector, West Champaran in the case of the petitioner and in several other land ceiling proceedings in that district. The Secretary assured the court that he in consultation with the Board of Revenue will examine each matter pointed out to him by the court and shall take remedial measures. He also gave assurance that he would see to it that the Collector did not act in such arbitrary and high handed manner and in future such cases would not come to this Court. 3. In this case a show cause has been filed on behalf of the Collector and a supplementary affidavit by the petitioner. In the supplementary affidavit, it is stated that the possession of the lands in question was restored to the petitioner on 20.12.2002 at about 4.00 P.M. and since then the lands were under his possession. It is, however, stated that while the lands were taken over by the Collector, crops standing over an area of 12.93 acres were harvested and were lost by way of theft and as a result. the petitioner suffered losses, according to him, amounting to Rs. 4,80,000/-. 4. On this aspect of the matter, this Court would not like to make any observation in this proceeding. 5. Against the order passed by the Collector, West Champaran, Bettiah dismissing the petitioners appeal, a revision has already been filed which remains pending before the Member, Board of Revenue. The petitioners case on merit has, thus, to be considered in that revision before the Board of Revenue. 6. This writ petition was filed because even while the revision was pending, the Collector, West Champaran got the petitioner forcibly dispossessed from the lands declared surplus in his order and issued Parchas, distributing those lands. Thus, for all intent and purposes the revision filed by the petitioner was rendered infructuous. This was plainly an arbitrary aberration in the normal and lawful course of the land ceiling proceeding. 7. Thus, for all intent and purposes the revision filed by the petitioner was rendered infructuous. This was plainly an arbitrary aberration in the normal and lawful course of the land ceiling proceeding. 7. The possession of the lands having been restored to the petitioner, that aberration has been rectified and the land ceiling case must now be allowed to proceed in accordance with law; that is to say, the Board of Revenue will consider the petitioners revision against the appellate order passed by the Collector and will pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law. The question of the petitioner having any surplus land will abide by the order(s) passed by the Board of Revenue or by any other superior court. 8. This writ petition has, thus, served its purpose and no further order need be passed in this case. 9. As regards the petitioners claim for compensation for the loss suffered by him as a result of cutting away of the standing crops, it will be open to him to seek his remedies before a civil court of competent jurisdiction or before any other suitable forum, in accordance with law. 10. Before parting with the records of this case, I would like to make certain observations with regard to cases coming to this Court from land ceiling proceedings from the district of West Champaran. Around fifty cases arising from land ceiling proceedings in West Champaran are currently running on the list of this Court. In some of the cases, this Court came across orders passed by the Collector which, to say the least, are quite shocking. In some other cases, the petitioners make allegations that the Collector was acting in complete disregard of the provisions of law and/or of the orders or directions issued by superior courts, including this Court. 11. In some cases the petitioners allege that after passing the order dismissing the appeal, the Collector continued to hold back the records; in the next few days a final statement was issued under section 11 (1) of the Act and Parchas were granted distributing the lands declared as surplus by his order and only then the records were released and the petitioner-land holder was able to obtain certified copy of the order. Thus, for all intent and purposes any relief to the land holder as provided in law by way of revision and/or writ petition was frustrated. 12. Thus, for all intent and purposes any relief to the land holder as provided in law by way of revision and/or writ petition was frustrated. 12. This Court brought all those matters to the notice of Mr. Subramaniyam, Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms. Mr. Subramaniyam expressed regrets and assured the court that he in consultation with the Board of Revenue will examine all those cases in detail and take all possible remedial measures at his own level. He further assured the court that steps will be taken that such unreasonable orders may not be passed by the statutory authorities in land ceiling proceedings and such matters may not come to the notice of the court in future. This court accepts the assurance given by Mr. Subramaniyam and expects that the position will improve in West Champaran and such matters will not be coming to this Court which are unnecessarily cluttering the dockets of this Court apart from causing great harassment and irreparable loss to individual citizens. 13. Let the records of this case be finally closed. 14. Let a copy of this order be given to Mr. Arshad Alam, Standing Counsel No. IV for being handed over to Mr. Subramaniyam.