KAILASH MAGOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed, inter alia, for a direction to the opposite party no.1 to produce the trace map of the plot for disposal of the mutation case.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the short facts of the case are that one Dibakar Rana was a landless person. By order dated 23.7.1979, the Tahasildar, Panposh in Lease Case No.4 of 1979-80 leased out an area of Ac.2.00 dec. appertaining to Khata No.204, Plot No.820/1 of village-Garjan in his favour subject to payment of forest royalty. There was a condition that the lessee shall not transfer the land within ten years. Patta was issued in his favour, vide Annexure2. Kissam of the land is Goda. While matter stood thus, to press the legal necessity, the lessee alienated the land in favour of the petitioner by means of a registered sale deed dated 17.5.1995 for a valid consideration and delivered possession. Thereafter, she filed Mutation Case No.349 of 1995 before the Tahasildar to mutate the land in her favour. By order dated 11.7.1995, the Tahasildar directed the R.I to furnish the report. The R.I had submitted a report on 16.8.1995 in her favour. On 8.9.2000, the Tahasildar dropped the case holding that the kissam of the land is 'patra jungle'. Thereafter, she filed another Mutation Case No.319 of 2007 before the Tahasildar renewing the prayer. The Tahasildar dismissed the case holding that the suit land stood recorded in Abad Jogya Anabadi Khata No.204, Plot No.820 of village-Garjan. Kissam of the land has been changed from 'forest' to 'patita'. It is not clear which part of the plot, the petitioner had purchased out of total area in khata no.204, plot no.820 of village-Garjan. Felt aggrieved, the petitioner filed Revenue Appeal Case No.23 of 2007 before the Sub-Collector, Panposh, Rourkela, opposite party no.3. Opposite party no.3 remanded the matter to the Tahasildar for de novo hearing with a direction to the petitioner to produce the trace map. The grievance of the petitioner is that she is a bona fide purchaser for value. She filed mutation case in the year 1995. Till yet the same has not been disposed of. She is running from pillar to post.

(3.) Opposite parties 2 to 4 filed a counter affidavit pleading, inter alia, that by order dated 13.8.1979, the Tahasildar in Lease Case No.4 of 1979-80 leased out an area of Ac.2.00 dec. of land appertaining to plot no.820 holding no.204 of village-Garjan in favour of Dibakar Rana. In Touzi Misc. Case No.20 of 1995, the petitioner was given Ac.7.35 out of same plot no.820 for quarry along with other two plots of the same village. A direction was issued to the R.I, Kalunga to submit a report. Though the petitioner had stated that the R.I had submitted a report on 16.8.1995, but the date had been over-written. There was no initial of the Tahasildar. The kissam of the land is 'patra jungle'. The Tahasildar dropped the mutation case. In De-reservation Proceeding No.1 of 1986, the kissam of the land was changed to 'patita' in the year 2004. The petitioner filed Mutation Case No.319 of 2007. On 16.6.2007, R.I, Kalunga submitted the report stating that there was no trace map of the purchased area to ascertain which portion of the plot was purchased by the petitioner. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner could not be considered. Since the petitioner had purchased a fraction of plot no.820, it was incumbent upon her to get a trace map of the land purchased from the seller. The Sub-Collector remanded matter to the Tahasildar for de novo hearing. The petitioner had not complied with the direction of the appellate authority. The villagers of Garjan as well as Garjan Grama Panchayat had vehemently objected to the operation of the stone quarry of the petitioner besides three other quarries of the same village till 1.8.2012. It was proposed to close operation of four quarries. The case had been protracted due to non-production of trace map.