AINUL HAQUE Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the revisional survey, the father of the Respondents No. 5 and 6 was shown as the riayat of the land, being the subject -matter of the Writ Petition. It is not known when the father of the Respondents No. 5 and 6 died. Be that as it may, a proceeding was initiated against the Respondents No. 5 and 6 under the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961. That was contested by the Respondents No. 5 and 6. In terms of the provisions contained in the said Act, in relation to lands, being the subject -matter of proceedings initiated under the Act, a draft statement is required to be prepared. There are provisions in the said Act for publication of such draft statement in the Official Gazette of the district and at such places and in such manner as may be prescribed. The prescription directs that a copy of such notice shall also be affixed to the Notice Board of the office of the Collector, Anchal Adhikari and Gram Panchayat within whose jurjdiction the land or part thereof, to which the notice or order relates, is situate. After an objection to such draft statement is disposed of, such draft statement is required to be finally published in the Official Gazette. Subsequent thereto acquisition of surplus land pursuant to the finally published draft statement is effected by once again publishing a notification in the Official Gazette. In the instant case, a Notification under Sec.15(1) was published as far back as on 5th June, 1989. It is not known when the notification finally publishing the draft statement was published.

(2.) THE Appellant on 17th May, 1997 filed a writ petition and thereby contended that he is the owner of the land measuring about 4 acres, which has been acquired by the said Notification published on 5th June, 1989 proceeding on the basis that the same belongs to the Respondents No. 5 and 6. when, in fact, the same belongs to the Appellant. It was contended that a suit was filed by the Appellant against the Respondents No. 5 and 6 in the year 1972 and the same was compromised and, on the basis of such compromise, a decree was also passed in 1972 and, by virtue thereof, the Appellant became the owner of the land in question. The amended provisions of the Act came into effect on 9th September, 1970. In terms thereof, any land holder holding land in excess of the ceiling area was debarred from transferring any land held by him except with the previous permission in writing of the Collector until such time a Notification under Sec.15 is published.

(3.) BEFORE the Writ Court, it was contended that in the cadestral survey, this land was recorded in the name of the forefather of the Appellant. However, at the same time, no attempt was made to establish that since the. recording in the cadastral survey until at least upto 1957, rates and taxes pertaining to the land in question had been paid by the father or the forefather of the Appellant. In other words, apart from making assertions, there was nothing on record which would suggest that either the title or possession of the land in question remained in the family of the Appellant until the revisional survey was made and thereafter.