Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 1104 (PAT)

Siddheshwar Singh v. State of Bihar

2024-11-25

MOHIT KUMAR SHAH

body2024
Mohit Kumar Shah, J.—The present writ petition has been filed for directing the State respondents to declare the raiyati land of the petitioner, appertaining to Khata No.180, Plots No.1091, 1092 and 1093, situated at Mauza-Jamuna, P.S.-Imamganj, District- Gaya as the private land of the petitioner and for making payment of proper compensation amount to the petitioner, in case the respondents seek to acquire the raiyati land of the petitioner. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order dated 30.04.1987, passed in Chakbandi Case No.144 of 1985 by the Consolidation Officer, Imamganj, Gaya, the aforesaid land of the petitioner has been held to be owned and possessed by the petitioner and the said order dated 30.04.1987 has also been affirmed in appeal, by an order dated 17.02.1988. It is also stated that Jamabandi bearing Jamabandi No.186 is existing in favour of the petitioner qua the aforesaid land in question and he is also paying rent to the Government regularly. Nonetheless, the respondents, vide Gazette Notification dated 22.07.2022, published in the newspaper, have sought to acquire certain plots of land for construction/expansion of Greenfield Expressway/Highway and the plots of the petitioner also find place in the said notification dated 22.07.2022, however, the same have been depicted therein as government land instead of private raiyati land of the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents be directed to rectify their records and in case they propose to declare the land in question as a public land, they should approach the learned Civil Court of competent jurisdiction in view of the fact that such complex and disputed questions of facts, with regard to right, title and interest over the land in question cannot be decided in a summary proceeding. Reference in this connection has been made to a judgment rendered by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Nagendra Mistry vs. State of Bihar & Ors., reported in 2000 (1) PLJR 209 , as also the one rendered by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Md. Jamalluddin & Ors. vs. the State of Bihar & Ors. reported in 2010 (2) PLJR 518 . 3. Jamalluddin & Ors. vs. the State of Bihar & Ors. reported in 2010 (2) PLJR 518 . 3. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents-State has submitted by referring to the counter affidavit filed in the present case that though it is true that consolidation notification has been made under Section 3(1) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956, however the same has not been denotified under Section 26A of the said Act and in the meantime, the entire consolidation process has stood cancelled by the State of Bihar, hence it is submitted that the land in question is a government land as per the Cadastral Survey Khatiyan, thus the present writ petition is fit to be dismissed. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, this Court finds that the respondents have failed to bring on record a copy of the Cadastral Survey Khatian so as to prove that the land in question is a public land, nonetheless, the petitioner has produced an order dated 30.04.1987, passed by the Consolidation Officer, Imamganj wherein it has been recorded that the land in question is a raiyati land of the petitioner and he is in possession thereof which is ample proof of the possession of the petitioner over the land in question and the same has not been disputed by the respondents. Hence, unless and until the respondents get a declaration from the learned Civil Court of competent jurisdiction with regard to the aforesaid land being a public land, the nature of the land cannot be changed in absence of any Cadastral Survey Khatiyan having been brought on record by the respondents. Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it fit and proper to hold that till the time the respondents get a declaration from the learned Civil Court of competent jurisdiction with regard to the aforesaid land in question being a public land and till the time the Jamabandi in favour of the petitioner, is in existence, the aforesaid land in question shall be regarded to be the private raiyati land of the petitioner. The acquisition authorities shall act accordingly, by considering the said land to be the raiyati land of the petitioner. 5. The writ petition stands disposed off on the aforesaid terms.