ABDUL ZABBAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 20th April, 1983, as contained in Annexure-7 by which the Jamabandi opened in the name of the father of the petitioner has been cancelled.

(2.) It appears that a proceeding for cancellation of Jamabandi was initiated against the father of the petitioner, vide Case No. 12 of 1982-83, with regard to a price of land appertaining to Plot No. 305, Khata No. 275. area 7 decimal situated in village Khodaibagh. In the proceeding aforesaid, the petitioner was noticed to file his show cause and the petitioner, pursuant to the order aforesaid, appeared before the respondent No. 4 and filed his show cause stating therein inter alia that the land in question was settled to the father of the petitioner in the year 1945 by virtue of Hukumnama by the ex-intermediary i. e. Majha State. Subsequently, thereafter in the year 1952, the Jama was opened in the name of the father of the petitioner and right from 1945 he is coming in peaceful possession of the land in question and by virtue of Hukumnama aforesaid, he has acquired right, title and interest over the land in question. It appears from the impugned order that the show cause of the petitioner was considered and on the ground that since it is a public land, no Jama could have been opened in the name of father of the petitioner, the same has been cancelled by respondent No. 4, vide the impugned order.

(3.) Mr. Kaushlendra Kumar Singh learned counsel for the petitioner states that the respondent No. 4 had no authority in law to pass the impugned order inasmuch as that no appeal or revision has been filed against the order by which Jama was opened in the name of father of the petitioner in the year 1952. He further states that earlier a proceeding under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act was initiated in the year 1952 and the same was dropped in the year 1952. It is further stated that similarly a proceeding under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was also initiated against the petitioner for the land in question and the same was also dropped. Mr. Singh in support of his proposition that the State should have filed a revision or appeal against the order by which the Jamabandi was opened in the name of father of the petitioner has placed reliance in the case of JamaJuddin Ahmad V. S. D. O., Khagaria and other, 1979 BBCJ 605. It has been held in the case (Supra) that when a Jamabandi was opened and a right had accrued to the parties, since there was no appeal or revision filed against the order of mutation or Jamabandi, the Jamabandi could not have been cancelled. On a perusal of the judgment aforesaid, I find substance in the submission of Mr. Singh and further find that no such stops have 'been taken by the State to undo the mutation or the Jamabandi opened in the name of the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 in a most arbitrary manner has passed the impugned order cancelling the Jamabandi. Mr. Singh further states that a valuable right has accrued to the petitioner by constructing a house over the land in question and he has acquired valid right, title and interest over the property in question and he cannot be ousted in a most cavalier fashion by passing the impugned order and without following the correct procedure laid down in law.