Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4152 (JHR)

RAJDEO YADAV ALIAS CHIGAL MAHTO v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY LAND AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT

WPC/440/2024 · 2025-09-17

Rajesh Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:28641 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Civil Writ Jurisdiction) W.P. (C) No.440 of 2024 ---- Rajdeo Yadav @ Chigal Mahto aged about 73 yrs. son of Mallu Yadav @ Mallu Mahto, resident of Village Kharika Tola Jamuniya Tand, P.O. Dhangada, P.S. Tandwa, District -Chatra. …. …. Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Chatra, P.O., P.S. & District Chatra. 3. The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Simariya, P.O., P.S. Simariya, District - Chatra. 4. The Circle Officer, Tandwa, P.O., P.S. Chatra. Tandwa, District-Chatra. 5. Kauleshwar Sao son of Munni Sao, resident of Village Dhangada, P.O. Dhangada, P.S. - Tandwa, District - Chatra. 6. Kameshwar Sao son of Munni Sao, resident of Village -Dhangada, P.O. Dhangada, P.S. - Tandwa, District - Chatra. 7. Dhaneshwar Sao son of Munni Sao, resident of Village Dhangada, P.O. Dhangada, P.S. - Tandwa, District - Chatra.…. …. Respondent(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajiv Nandan Prasad, Adv. Mr. Sushant Kr. Sinha, Adv. For the State : Mrs. Apoorva Singh, A.C. to S.C. (Mines)-II For the Respondents : Mr. Shadab Eqbal, Adv. ---- 07/Dated: 17th September, 2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed for following reliefs:- “for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for setting aside the order dated 27.06.2023 passed by the Court of Learned Deputy Commissioner, Chatra in Mutation Revision Case No. 18/2021-22 dismissing the mutation revision case filed by the petitioners against the order dated 5.4.2021 passed by Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Simariya in Mutation Case No. 12/2018-19 rejecting the recommendation made by the Circle Officer, Tandwa vide order dated 23.6.2018 in Mutation Case No. 12/2018-19 against the settled principles of law with respect to the land appertaining to khata no. 36, Plot no. 800, 902, total area 2.01 acres situated in Mauza Kharika, P.S. Tandwa, District Chatra, in a most illegal arbitrary manner in view of the fact that the petitioner has purchased the land from the Khatiyani raiyat through registered sale deed no. 6208 dated 5.12.2003 and got his name mutated in the revenue record whereas the private respondents 2025:JHHC:28641 Page | 2 W.P. (C) No.440 of 2024 subsequently purchased the land from a person having no share in the land in question and as such the petitioner has perfect right, title, possession and interest over the said land and therefore the circle officer has rightly passed the order to continue Jamabandi in the name of petitioner.” 2. The description of the land is as follows:- “Land appertaining to khata no.36, Plot No.800, 902, total area 2.01 acres situated in Mauza Kharika, P.S. – Tandwa, District – Chatra,” 3. Sri Vijay Kumar Das, the Circle Officer, Tandwa, Chatra is present before this Court with necessary documents. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 5. From the assistance of the Circle Officer, Tandwa and the pleading of the parties, it appears that the land in question is a raiyati land and the mutation was in the name of Chhedi Sao and the mutation is of the year 1945. That land is a joint family property. The inheritance of mutation or transfer of mutation has never been acted upon. Thus, the mutation holder was Chhedi Sao till the year 2005. 6. It appears that the petitioner has purchased the above piece of land in the year 2003 from heirs of Chhedi Sao and his brother Kanchan Sao and the name was mutated in the revenue record. Subsequently, the private respondents had purchased the same land from Mahavir Sao, son of Chhedi Sao, in the year 2006. 7. Admittedly, both the sellers were not the mutation holder. There is no material to suggest that the family property in question has ever been partitioned by mutual agreement or by decree of the Court. Thus, the status of the property is still joint in nature. 8. It is settled principle of law that the seller can transfer what he possesses and not more than that. Further, the Revenue Authority has no power to decide the title of the properties. 9. In view of the above factual matrix, the order dated 27.06.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra in Mutation Revision Case No.18 of 2021-22, order dated 05.04.2021 passed by the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Simariya and the order dated 23.06.2018 passed by the Circle 2025:JHHC:28641 Page | 3 W.P. (C) No.440 of 2024 Officer, Tandwa, Chatra in Mutation Case No.12 of 2018-19, are hereby quashed and set aside. However, the parties are at liberty to work out their remedies in accordance with law. 10. With aforesaid liberty, the present writ petition stands disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 17th September, 2025 Amar/- Uploaded