Rajesh Shankar, J. - (1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 26.7.1998 by the Circle Officer, Sadar, Ranchi whereby, the Jamabandi running in the name of the petitioners with respect to the land appertaining to R.S. Plot No. 336, Sub-Plot No. 336/K, under Khata No. 119, situated at Mouza-Bajra, P.S.-Sukhdeonagar, District-Ranchi (hereinafter referred to 'as the said land') has been cancelled. The factual background of the case, as stated in the writ petition, is that the tend in question was originally recorded in the name of Maharaj Kumar Manghil Lal Jugal Kishor Nath Sahdeo and the same was settled in favour of Jagdishparsanna Nath Sahdeo on 15.11.1915 by virtue of Hukumnama. Further, said Jagdishparsanna Nath Sahdeo settled the said land as well as some other land to one Jai Kumar Nath Sahdeo on 1.3.1935 by a Hukumnama with Chhaparbandi right. Thereafter, the said land was sold to Kumar Shri Mahendra Pratap Singh Deo in the year 1960, who came in possession of the same. The said land was also mutated in the name of Kumar Shri Mahendra Pratap Singh Deo vide order dated 29.5.1984 passed in Mutation Case No. 1699-R-27/1983-84. The petitioners purchased some part of the said land in the year 1985 and came in possession of the same and also made construction thereon. The purchased land were also mutated in their respective names and they paid rent thereof to the State. However, suddenly vide order dated 26.7.1998, the Jamabandi running in the name of the petitioners has been cancelled, which gives rise to filing of the present writ petition.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Jagdishparsanna Nath Sahdeo had also settled the said land under Khata Nos. 119 & 113 to one Ishwar Dayal Singh on 2.2.1952, which was subsequently transferred by a sale-deed to one Mithila Sahakari Grih Nirman Samittee Ltd. whose name was also mutated in Mutation Case No. 1067-R-27/83-84. However, a proceeding under Section 4(h) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1950') was initiated against Ishwar Dayal Singh and finally the settlement was cancelled. Mithila Sahakari Grih Nirman Samittee Ltd. filed a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 4320 of 2002 against the said cancellation and finally vide order dated 25.4.2003, the said writ petition was allowed holding that the settlee has been in possession of the said land for about 5-6 decades and the required entry has already been made by the respondents in Register-II of the concerned Revenue Circle. The rent of the said land has also been realized from the settlee as well as the transferee of the said land. It is further submitted that the appeal filed against the said order being L.P.A. No. 818 of 2003, was also dismissed vide order dated 13.12.2004. The petitioners' case also stands on the similar footing. The petitioners have been in possession of the said land for more than 25 years and prior to that, their vendor had been in possession of the said land for the period of more than 35 years and after expiry of about 60 years, the respondents are trying to dispute their title and possession over the respective land. It is also submitted that as per the provisions of Bihar Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records of Right) Act, 1973, while issuing the rent receipt, the respondents are required to see the possession only. It is settled position of law that while dealing with the mutation matter, the concerned revenue authority has to see only the possession and if it is found correct, the authority should issue the rent receipt, as allowing the mutation application and acceptance of rent do not create any title in favour of a person over the land. It is further submitted that the Jamabandi is running in the name of the petitioners for the last three decades and as such the aggrieved party has to take shelter before the competent Civil Court for claiming the title over the land. The petitioners are the bona fide purchasers of the land in question and their names have been mutated after making due enquiry on the factum of possession. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Ranchi (respondent No. 3) has no jurisdiction to cancel the long running Jamabandi without taking recourse of law or without initiating any proceeding under Section 4(h) of the Act, 1950.
(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the said land is recorded in the R.S. Record of Right as 'Gair Mazurwa Malik' having nature of 'Parti Pathar', 'Parti Garah' and Tungri' and as such the said land has vested in the Government under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act, 1950. The Jamabandi of the said land was recorded in the name of Jai Kumar Nath Sahdeo in collusion and connivance with the then Revenue Officials without obtaining any order of the competent authority, but no rent receipt was issued in his favour. The illegal Jamabandi running in the name of Jai Kumar Nath Sahdeo has been cancelled by the then Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Ranchi in terms with the order dated 21.5.1998 passed in Misc. Case No. 29 of 1993-94 and entry to that effect has already been made in Register-II. It is further submitted that the case of the petitioners is not similar to that of W.P.(C) No. 4320 of 2002 and as such the law laid down in that case is not applicable to the case of the petitioners.;