MANORAMA GUPTA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner by way of filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for grant of an appropriate writ/ direction commanding upon the respondent no. 3 to accept the rent and issue rent receipt to the petitioner in respect of the land in question pursuant to mutation order dated 6.1.1978 in Mutation Case No. 812R -27 of 1976 -77. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner by referred annexure -1 pointed out that the land in question was purchased by the registered sale deed on 29.7.1975 and thereafter vide annexure -2 mutation was done on 6.1.1978 and correction slip was issued accordingly. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that thereafter respondents -authorities stopped issuance of rent receipt without disclosing any reason. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that respondents have filed counter affidavits in this matter and took stand that since the land in question was falling within the jurisdiction of the Urban Land(Ceiling and Regulation)Act, 1976, therefore, the respondent did not issue any rent receipt. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that now the Urban Land(Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 has been repealed by Urban Land(Ceiling and Regulation)Repeal Act, 1999 and the said repeal Act of 1999 has been adopted by the State of Jharkhand with effect from 24.1.2001 by a Resolution dated 24.1.2011. As a consequence, all proceedings relating to any order made or purported to be made under the Principal Act in U.L.C. stands abated in view of section 4 of the Repeal Act, 1999. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that the land in question was purchased prior to the Act came into force.

(2.) THE learned counsel appearing for the Respondent -State Government by referring the counter affidavit filed by the Respondent -State Government pointed out that the rent receipt could not be issued in favour of the present petitioner as the present land in question was not covered under the Urban Land(Ceiling and Regulation)Act 1976 and in respect thereof the learned counsel for the respondent has referred to and relied upon the notification issued under the Act which is annexed vide Annexure -A to the counter affidavit.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has placed a copy of the said order on record and relied upon the same