ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY,J. - (1.) Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar Gupta, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Amit Kumar Verma, learned J.C. to S.C(L &C).
(2.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for the following reliefs:- a. for quashing the order dated 25.08.2006 passed by the deputy commissioner Ranchi ( Respondent no. 4) in Case No. 141/R-15/02-03 as contained in Annexure 12 to the writ petition whereby the said authority has been pleased to dismiss the Revision filed by the petitioners. b. for issuance of a writ/order/direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to mutate the names of the petitioners in the Government Revenue Records c. for issuance of show cause against the respondent no. 5 as to how he has passed an order after his transfer from the post as also as to how he has passed the final order in the Revision case after nearly two and halt years from the date of hearing of final arguments. d. The petitioners had filed petition for amendment of the writ petition being I.A No. 819 of 2008 challenging the orders dated 18.5.2002/24.5.2002 passed by the Circle Officer, Ranchi in Mutation Case No. 105/2000-200V as contained in Annexure-14 to the writ petition and also challenging the order dated 19.9.2002 passed by the Land Reform Deputy Collector, Sadar, Ranchi in Mutation Appeal No. 21R/02-03 as contained in Annexure-15 to the writ application. This petition for amendment was allowed vide order dated 27.04.2009. Thus the orders passed by the circle officer as well as the appellate authority are also under challenge.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners while giving the factual background of the case submits as under:- (i) Plot involved in this case is plot nos. 317,318 and 319 situated at Chandwe within the district of Ranchi. (ii) According to the petitioners, the aforesaid plots were Gairmajarua Malik lands of the then Landlord Rajguru Sridharnath Rao Pendse who made Chhapparbandi settlement by registered deed dated 2.9.1940. (iii) The said Chhaparbandi settlement was followed by registered deed of Kabuliat dated 3.10.1940. (iv) An enquiry was conducted by the Circle Officer, Kanke who confirmed that the aforesaid documents were registered vide his letter dated 17.6.2000. (v) The specific case of the petitioners is that the aforesaid land was settled by the landlord in favour of Ranglal Jalana with Chhapparbandi rights and the settlee Ranglal Jalana paid rent to the Landlord against receipts. (vi) Further case of the petitioners is that intermediary estate vested in the State of Bihar on promulgation of Bihar Land Reforms Act 1950. (vii) Intermediary estate vested in the State of Bihar on promulgation of Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950. However there was a confusion as to whether in respect of lands with Chhaparbandi rights, the estate of the Landlord had vested in the State of Bihar or not. Title Suit No. 161 of 1956 and Title Suit No. 162 of 1956, were filed and they were decided analogously by the court of 1st Additional Munsif, Ranchi. By judgment dated 22.8.1959 the learned Additional Munsif held that in respect of Chhaparbandi lands the right of the ex-intermediary to collect rent had vested in the State of Bihar. (viii) On the basis of the aforesaid judgment and decree, the then Landlord Rajguru S.V.R. pendse wrote a letter dated 17th December, 1959 and claimed payment of Chhaparbandi rent from with interest from Ranglal Jalan. (ix) Circle Officer, Kanke served a notice on Ranglal Jalan demanding rent and stating that Ranglal Jalan should appear on 18.8.1959 to substantiate payment of rent to ex-intermediary for last two years. (x) Ranglal Jalan sent reply by registered post with A/D and was received in the office of the Circle Officer, Kanke. (xi) Thereafter C.O. Kanke sent notice dated 8th September 1959 to Ranglal Jalan asking him to appear on 17.9.1959 with receipt to show payment of rent to ex Landlord. (xii) Ranglai Jalan submitted reply dated 5.12.1960. (xiii) That thereafter the Circle Office, Kanke sent Letter No. 26 dated 2.2.1961 directing Ranglal Jalan to pay Chhaparbandi malgujari. (xiv) Accordingly Ranglal Jalan began paying Chhaparbandi rent to the State Government from against duly issued receipts and Rent was paid up to 2001 A.D. (xv) That on the aforesaid property residential houses and structures have been constructed and the property is now denoted as Municipal Holding No. 227/A of Ward I B and for the same taxes have been paid. (xvi) That Ranglal Jalan died leaving behind two sons Surajmal Jalan and Sitaram Jalan. Sitaram Jalan filed Partition Suit no. 11 of 1988 wherein a decree in terms of compromise was passed on 7th June, 1999. And by the terms of the aforesaid decree the Petitioners were allotted the property involved in this case. (xvii) The petitioners applied for mutation before the Circle Officer, Kanke and said application filed by the Petitioners was registered as Case No. 103 of 2000-2001. (xviii) The circle officer, Kanke rejected the application for mutation vide order dated 24th May 2004 on the grounds that: i. In the R.S. Khatian the concerned plots were recorded as Gairmajarua lands. ii. The return submitted by the Landlord after vesting is available, and iii. No final decree has been passed in the partition suit. (xix) Thereafter, the Petitioners filed an Appeal before the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Ranchi i.e., Respondent no. 3 herein and the same was numbered as Mutation Appeal No. 21 Rule 15 of 2002-03. Respondent no. 3 dismissed the Appeal on 19th September, 2002 holding that as the nature of the land is Gairmajarua and the position of the land prior to 1961 is clear from the Register II and as such mutation in respect of the same cannot be allowed. (xx) Thereafter the Petitioners filed a Revision application before the Collector Cum Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi i.e., Respondent no.4, which was numbered as Case no. 141/R-15 of 2002-03.;