R.K.MERATHIA,J. - (1.) HEARD .
(2.) PETITIONER has filed this writ petition essentially for a direction upon the respondent No. 2/registering authority lo register the sale deed presented on 29.3.1999 for registration. It is submitted by Mr. Prasari. learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, that when registration was refused on the ground that the land in question was Khasmahal land, petitioner filed a writ petition being CWJC No. 3873 of 2000. which was disposed of on 5.3.2001 with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the Deputy Com missioner, Ranchi. who was directed to look into the record, if necessary, hear the Additional Collector and give finding of fact relating to nature of land. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner passed the impugned order on 4.9.2001 as contained in the order sheet (Annexure -7) holding that the land is Khasmahal and it cannot be transferred without permission. He further submitted that in the said order itself, it is recorded that the Circle Officer. Town Anchal, Ranchi. in his report dated 18.5.1999 confirmed that the land was; not the Khasmahal but only on the basis of the entry in Register -I and then in Register -II. the authorities have refused to register the said sale deed. 2002 (3) JCR 152 (Jhr), Pankaj Kumar Harlalka v. State and submitted that similar order may be passed in this case. 5. Mr. Akhtar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, submitted that it is true that in the municipal survey, the name of Harenchandra Mukherjee was recorded as raiyat but subsequently in the Khasmahal survey, the land was found to be Khasmahal land and it was recorded in Register and II accordingly and in the municipal survey also they were shown as Khasmahal land by mentioning Khasmahal Plot No. 86. He further submitted that as the lands were recorded as Khasmahal Land, execution or non -execution of lease deed would not affect the status of the land as Khasmahal land. 6. In my opinion, the order of Pankaj Kumar Harlalka. (supra), is applicable in this case. In that case also, the authorities contended that the lands were Khasmahal lands on the basis of certain correspondences. 7. In the circumstances, the respondents are directed to register the sale deed in question, in accordance with law, as ex -peditiously as possible and preferably within a period of one month from the dale of communication of a copy of this order. However, it is made clear that if there is any statutory violation then it will be open to the respondents to take steps in accordance with law and in that event this order will not stand in their way. It is also made clear that mere registration of tin: said document will not confer any title unless the same is proved in accordance with law, if and when challenged. With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Petition disposed of.;