D N JATIA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER herein has invoked this Courts' writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the order of the Additional Collector at Deoghar, district Deoghar dated 8-12-1989 (Annexure-'5'). under which he has held that the petitioner's lease-hold was valid until 1955 and since thereafter, his possession was illegally, the property accordingly stood reverted to the State, Zamabandi in the name of the petitioner was illegal and accordingly the same was ordered to be cancelled and Dy. Collector Land Reforms, Deoghar was directed to take possession of the property in question from the petitioner.

(2.) A Ghatwali Estate known as Rohini Estate was under Court of Wards, when on 3-2-1906 the Commissioner, Bhagalpur Division on behalf of Court of wards of the said Estate executed a lease for a period of 50 years in favour of one Sri Yogendra Nath Bose. The Law governing the rights and interests of Ghatwalis in the lands held by them at the relevant time was the Bengal Ghatwal Act, 1959. Section 1 of the said Act recognised the right of the Ghatwals of Birbhum (as the area was then known) of granting leases of any period which they deemed conductive to the improvement of their tenures as was allowed by law to the proprieties of other lands, provided that no lease of Ghatwali lands for any period extending beyond the life time or incumbency of the grant of the lease was valid and binding on the successors of the grantor unless the same was granted for the working of mines or for the clearing of jungle or for the irrection of dwelling houses or manufacturers or for tanks, Canals or for similar works and approved by the Commissioner of the Division, such approval being certified by an endorsement of the lease under the signature of the Commissioner. Ssction-2 recognised the same rights in the court of wards and revenue authorities stating that, if any of the said Ghatwali lands be at any time under the superintendence of the court of wards or otherwise subject to the direct control of the Officers of the Government, it shall be lawful for the Court or the Commissioner to grant lease for any such purposes as aforesaid. Further the lease so granted shall be valid and binding on all future of the said lands anything in the existing law to the contrary notwithstanding."

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the proceeding as such, for which notice had been issued, was for deciding as to whether the building could be taken on rent or not, but the Additional Collector got a report from the Circle Officer, Deoghar as also records of a so called proceeding started by the Circle Officer, Deoghar, purportedly, on the ground that petitioner's lease had expired and without any opportunity afforded to the petitioner to show-cause and being heard as also without any authority under any law to do so, he held that since petitioner's lease had expired in the year 1955 and the erstwhile ghatwali estate known as Rohini estate had vested in the State of Bihar, the property ought to have been delivered to the State or acquired by the State in the year 1956. The petitioner had managed to get entry of the name of Onkarmal Jatia in the revenue records and Jamabandi. He accordingly ordered on 8-12-1989 to cancel the jamabandi and directed Dy. Collector Land Reforms to take possession of the property.