- (1.) Aggrieved by order dated 27.01.2011 issued by the Additional Collector, Singhbhum East and for a direction upon the respondents for accepting the rent and fixation of rent in relation to Ward No. 2 under Jugsalai Municipality, Khata No. 158, Plot No. 850, 871 and 872 total area measuring 0.06.94 hectares, the petitioner has approached this Court.
(2.) The writ petitioner has stated thus; One Gauri Shankar Singh and others were in possession of the property in relation to Mouza Jugsalai Ward No. 2, Purani Basti in Khata No. 158, Plot No. 850, 871 and 872, total area measuring 0.06.94 hectares and, in the record of rights it has been recorded as "Unabad Bihar (Jharkhand) Sarkar". They were in possession of the suit land since 1947 and they have constructed house over the plot in their occupation. On 12.01.1973, final publication of the Record of Rights was made. For the purpose of payment of rent an application under Section 85(2) of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 was filed and the case being Rent Fixation Case No. 08 of 2009 was registered. An enquiry was conducted in the matter and the Revenue Authorities found the petitioner in possession of the land in question. Accordingly, the Assistant Settlement Officer, Jamshedpur fixed the rent at the rate of Rs. 10/- for 40.47 sq. ft. and cess of Rs. 171/- and a separate Jamabandi was ordered to be open for payment of rent to the State. The report was subsequently submitted to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Dhalbhum, Jamshedpur vide letter dated 03.01.2009 stating that the land comprising of Mouza Jugsalai Ward No. 2, Purani Basti in Khata No. 158, Plot No. 850, 871 and 872, total area 0.06.94 hectares is in illegal possession of the petitioner and others. Vide impugned letter dated 27.01.2011 the Additional Collector, Singhbhum East directed the Sub-Divisional Officer, Dhalbhum, Jamshedpur for cancellation of the order passed in Rent Fixation Case No. 02 of 2009-2010 and for taking necessary action in the matter. Aggrieved the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
(3.) A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 6 stating that the land in question stands in the name of the State in the Revenue Records and there is no decree or order passed by a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction declaring the right of the petitioner with respect to the land in question. The procedure adopted in Rent Fixation Case No. 2 of 2009-10 was erroneous and contrary to law and therefore, the Government is not bound by the unauthorised act of its official. The final publication of the land in question was in the year, 1973 and Section 85 of C.N.T. provides that a landlord or a tenant may apply for settlement of fare rent within three months of final publication of record of rights. The petitioner is neither landlord nor tenant rather, he is an unauthorised occupant of the Government Land. Mere illegal possession of the Government Land cannot be made basis for fixation of rent in respect of Government Land. Petitioner is not entitled for fixation of rent on the basis of illegal possession and the procedure adopted by the Assistant Settlement Officer in Rent Fixation Case was contrary to law and therefore, order dated 25.08.2009 is not binding on the Government. Section 85(4) of the C.N.T. Act provides for appeal and there is a provision for revision under Section 89 of the C.N.T. Act. The petitioner without availing the alternative remedy, has approached this Court and therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.;