1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.6696 of 2023 ------- Arti Devi, aged about 60 years, wife of -Damodar Mahto, Residing at village –Chandaghasi (Tettri), P.O.&P.S.- Namkum, District-Ranchi ...… Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Department of Revenue Land Reforms and Registration, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. &P.S.-Dhurwa, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, officiating at and P.O.-GPO, P.S.-Kotwali, District - Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Ranchi, officiating at and P.O.-GPO, P.S.-Kotwali, District - Ranchi, Jharkhand. 5. The Circle Officer, Nagri, having its office besides Ranchi Gumla highway, P.O. & P.S. - Nagri, District - Ranchi. …. Respondents ------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner : Mr. Arun Kumar, Adv. : Mr. Awanish Shekhar, Adv. For the Res-State : AC to AG ------- 05/Dated:28.02.2025 1. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for quashing of letter contained in memo no. 2170(ii) dated 30.12.2015 (Annexure-4) issued by Respondent No. 5; whereby the Respondent No. 5 has put the land of the petitioner in prohibited list and stopped the construction work run by the petitioner in the light of memo no. 1203 dt. 10.07.2004 (Annexure-3) issued by Respondent No.3, related to land situated at Mouza Pundag under Khata 2 No. 383, Plot No. 284 measuring an area of 1.50 Acre OR for commanding upon the Respondent authorities, particularly Respondents no. 3 & 5, to immediately and forthwith release the land of the petitioner from prohibited list and further issue up to date rent receipt in favour of petitioner after accepting the rent appertaining to land which has been stopped by Respondent No. 5 pursuant to order passed by the Respondent No. 3 contained in memo no. 1203/G dt. 12.07.2004 (Annexure-3). 2. The brief facts of the case are that the land situated at Mouza Pundag, Plot no. 284, under Khata No. 383, measuring an area of 1.50 acres was recorded as Gairmajarua Khass in the Record of Rights in the name of Ex-landlord Bara lal Kandrap Nath Shahdeo and out of said total land an area of 1.50 acre was settled in the name of the grandfather of petitioner namely Kandru Teli. Kandru Teli. The grandfather of the petitioner died leaving behind his only daughter namely Bandhni Devi wife of Bigal Mahto and Bandhani Devi also died leaving behind her two daughters namely Arti Devi (petitioner) and Shivrati Devi. The respondent recognized the possession over the land in question and settlement right of the mother of the petitioner, opened Zamabandi in Register -II in her 3 favour and has accepted the rent and issued rent receipt to the mother of the petitioner since the year 1999-2000, and further for the year 2020-2021 for the land. However, after almost a period of seven (7) years an order to postpone/stop issuing rent receipt of the petitioner was issued pursuant to order of Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi vide letter No. 1203/G dated 12.07.2004 and the same entered in online register-II, vide online entry dated 5-11-2021 and accordingly land in question was put in prohibited list and also rent has not been accepted by them. Though, the petitioner has preferred series of representations before the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi and Circle Officer, Nagri, Ranchi (Respondent nos. 3 & 5 respectively), and made request to free her land from prohibited list and issue rent receipts for the land, but no action has been taken in this regard on part of the respondents. Hence, this writ application. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue in the present writ application is covered by the judgment dated 13th December, 2024 passed in W.P.(C) No. 847 of 2023 (Brinda Devi Agarwal Vs. State of Jharkhand). Learned counsel for the Respondents could not dispute the aforesaid position 4 4. Even otherwise, in view of the fact that the respondent authorities are not vested in any law to exercise any jurisdiction affecting the right, title and interest of any individual and it is only the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction, who will decide such issue. Placing any property in prohibited list is a colourable exercise of power and the State authorities cannot be the judge of its own cause. 5. Having regards to the above, the letter contained in memo no. 2170(ii) dated 30.12.2015 (Annexure-4) issued by Respondent No.5, is in nullity in the eye of law and hence quashed. 6. Consequently, the instant writ application stands allowed and the concerned Respondent authority is hereby directed to ensure that the land of the petitioner is released from the Prohibited List and further issue up to date rent receipt in favour of petitioner after accepting rent within a period of 2 weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. Pending I.A.s, if any, also stand closed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) Fahim/-