Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 655 (JHR)

Archana Sharma v. State of Jharkhand

2017-04-10

APARESH KUMAR SINGH

body2017
ORDER : Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State and the Railways. 2. Petitioner approached this Court with the following prayers: (i) To direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the land bearing Khata No.2, Plot No. 512/872 (Part), area 20 decimals and Khata No. 2, Plot No. 512/873 (Part) area 20 decimals with residential house constructed thereon in an area of 1000 square feet (approx) with boundary wall situated at Thana No. 45, Village Sihodih, P.S. Giridih (Muffasil), District Giridih. (ii) To also direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner form the land with boundary wall bearing Khata No. 2, Plot No. 512/872 (Part), Thana No. 45, area 50 decimals and khata no. 2, Plot No. 512/873, area 49 decimals, situated at Mauza Sihodih, P.S. Giridih (Muffasil) District Giridih in the State of Jharkhand. (iii) To direct the respondents to first pay the adequate compensation in terms of the provisions enshrined in the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 2013) and then to proceed further to use the lands of the petitioner for any public purpose including for the purpose of new railway line project from Koderma to Giridih in Village Sihodih, P.S. Giridih (Muffasil), District Giridih. (iv) During the pendency of this writ petition, the respondents be restrained to demolish the residential house of the petitioner along with cattle shades constructed in Khata No. 2, Plot No. 512/872 (Part) and Plot No. 512/873 (Part) of Thana No. 45, situated at Mauza Sihodi, P.S. Giridih (Muffasil), District Giridih, without acquiring the same in accordance with the provisions enshrined in the Act, 2013 for the purpose of new railway line project form Koderma to Giridih. 3. By way of supplementary affidavit, petitioner has enclosed instrument of sale dated 23.12.1968 relating to conveyance of land by Sri Hrishikesh Bose by registered sale deed no. 22630 to Sri Raghunath Mishra of a piece of land in Khata No. 2, plot nos. 512/872 and 512/873 at Village Sihodih, PS Giridih (Muffasil), Thana No. 45, District-Giridih; sale deed no. 503/477 executed by Raghunath Mishra to one Ajay Kumar Sinha an area of 20 decimals of land of both the plots; sale deed no. 504/478 by the same vendor to Manoj Kumar and Others of similar area of 20 decimals in both the plots; sale deed no. 503/477 executed by Raghunath Mishra to one Ajay Kumar Sinha an area of 20 decimals of land of both the plots; sale deed no. 504/478 by the same vendor to Manoj Kumar and Others of similar area of 20 decimals in both the plots; sale deed no. 11601/10233 dated 05.09.2011 by which one Kanhai Lal Bhageriya power of attorney holder of one Rajeev Kumar Sah sold an area of 40 decimals out of these two plots to the petitioner (Kanhai Lal Bhageriya is said to be power of attorney holder of one Rajeev Kumar Sah in whose favour land was sold through deed no. 11742/10443 by power of attorney holders of Ajay Kumar Sinha and Manoj Kumar). 4. Sale deed dated 16.01.2004 executed by Haribansh Mishra to Sneha Sinha and Manoj Kumar Sinha for an area of 49 decimals and 50 decimals respectively. Their power of attorney holder Sunil Kumar Barnwal sold these lands to petitioner by register sale deed no. 8011 dated 22.09.2012. 5. Petitioner contends that ownership and title of the property devolved upon her through these conveyance deeds by which lands were mutated and revenue receipts have been issued in respect of sale deed dated 22.09.2012. In respect of other 40 decimals of land also, rent receipts have been issued from 10.07.2012 onwards. However, petitioner was aggrieved by the action of the respondent in construction of railway line over these pieces of land without any acquisition and compensation paid. That compelled the petitioner to approach this Court. 6. Respondent nos. 3 and 4 filed their counter affidavit inter alia stating at para-9 as follows :- “That at the very outset it is submitted that admittedly Plot No. 512 besides other plot appertaining to Khata No. 2 of village Sihodih, Thana No. 45 of District Giridih is Gairmazzurwa Khas land. That compelled the petitioner to approach this Court. 6. Respondent nos. 3 and 4 filed their counter affidavit inter alia stating at para-9 as follows :- “That at the very outset it is submitted that admittedly Plot No. 512 besides other plot appertaining to Khata No. 2 of village Sihodih, Thana No. 45 of District Giridih is Gairmazzurwa Khas land. On the claim of petitioner of the writ petition an enquiry proceeding No. 03 of 201617 already has been initiated by the Anchal Adhikari, Giridih relating to claim of the petitioner in which petitioner has appeared on 03.03.2017 and has filed copy of Sale Deed basis of her claim of her purchased land out of Plot No. 512 and called for a report from Halka Karmchari and proceeding is posted to 15.03.2017 and as soon as final order is passed an additional counter affidavit shall be filed and as such writ petition is premature and is liable to be dismissed. In the above context it is submitted that land claimed by the petitioner through which Railway Line is to pass was lying vacant and petitioner recently started fencing the same to obstruct passing of Railway Line.” 7. Photocopy of requisition made by the Railways dated 20.01.2017 is enclosed as Annexure-A series. Learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that plot no. 512 being gairmazarua khas land, there was no reason for the petitioner to object to the construction of railway line. She, however, started fencing the said piece of land on initiation of construction activity. It has also been stated on their behalf that Circle Officer, Giridih initiated an Enquiry Proceedings No. 03/201617 and petitioner has also sought declaration of her raiyati status in respect of the said pieces of land. The claim is under consideration before the Circle Officer, Giridih. 8. Petitioner has filed a rejoinder and referred to letter no. 423 dated 12.02.2015 of the Department of Revenue & Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand wherein compensation is also required to be paid in respect of gairmazarua khas land, Annexure-16. 9. Respondent-Railways have also filed their counter affidavit inter alia taking the plea that it is under the process of laying down railway line and request for acquisition of land has also been made as and when situation warranted to the State Authorities. A sum of Rs. 9. Respondent-Railways have also filed their counter affidavit inter alia taking the plea that it is under the process of laying down railway line and request for acquisition of land has also been made as and when situation warranted to the State Authorities. A sum of Rs. 199.6 Crores have also been paid to the State Authorities for compensation to the displaced persons. After due clearance from the State Government, required construction of work has been done in the presence of the State Government Authorities. Petitioner has not annexed any khatian to substantiate her claim and mere submission of the sale deed does not constitute right and title over the piece of land. Petitioner has also moved before the Land Acquisition Officer, Giridih for compensation by grant of raiyat status of land, Annexure3 to the writ petition. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the provisions of the 'Right to Fair Compensation & Transparency' in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013'. The Definition of “affected family” under Section 3(c)', “displaced family” under Sub Section 'k', “family” under Sub Section 'm', “land owner” under Sub Section 'r' have been referred to. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied upon provision contained in chapter IV of the Act and contended that any person interested in any land, which has been notified under Section 11 Sub-Section 1 is entitled to make objection within a period prescribed from the date of publication of the preliminary notification. These protection under the Act of 2013 would be denied without due application of mind as to the status of the petitioner as a land owner. Petitioner has, therefore, approached this Court. 11. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that as on date, however, land is shown as gairmazarua khas land and petitioner has herself asked for declaration of raiyat status. The Circle Officer, Giridih in seisin of the proceedings has asked the petitioner to produce all documents in her support. 12. Considered the submissions of the parties in the light of the background facts noted hereinabove. The issue which revolves around the background facts is whether the State in order to execute a public project is required to issue a notification of acquisition in respect of land, which is claimed as a private holding by the petitioner or not. 12. Considered the submissions of the parties in the light of the background facts noted hereinabove. The issue which revolves around the background facts is whether the State in order to execute a public project is required to issue a notification of acquisition in respect of land, which is claimed as a private holding by the petitioner or not. The document/instrument of sale deed enclosed by the petitioner in the instant writ petition, however, does not enable the Court to come to any such finding on the title, ownership or raiyati status of the petitioner over the pieces of land. On the request made by the petitioner herself, the matter is being enquired by the Circle Officer, Giridih. Therefore, petitioner should cooperate in the proceedings and submit all supporting documents before the Circle Officer, Giridih within a period of one week from today. The Circle Officer, Giridih/Competent Revenue Authority after due enquiry from the relevant records and the documents produced by the petitioner would determine the raiyati status of the petitioner in accordance with law. If the raiyati status/claim of the petitioner on the pieces of land is established, State Authorities would proceed for acquisition of such pieces of land of the petitioner or any other similarly situated persons. In case the petitioner is unable to establish her claim of title, ownership and raiyati status on the pieces of the land, the respondent would be free to proceed in the matter in accordance with law. For a period of two weeks from today or till a decision is taken by the Circle Officer, Giridih/Competent Authority in the matter, whichever is earlier, status quo be maintained in respect of the aforesaid pieces of land. 13. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.