2026:JHHC:21453 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 3982 of 2021 Md. Jahid Miyan, S/o Late Rahim Miyan, R/o Village- Pandu, PO Pandu, PS Keredari, District Hazaribagh, Jharkhand .... Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2.The Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh 3.The Additional Collector, Hazaribagh 4.The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Hazaribagh 5.The Circle Officer, Keredari Block, Hazaribagh . … Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 3435 of 2021 Md. Shamim Miyan @ Md. Shamim, S/o Mojim Miyan, R/o Village- Kabed, PO Pandu, PS Keredari, District Hazaribagh, Jharkhand .... Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2.The Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh 3.The Additional Collector, Hazaribagh 4.The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Hazaribagh 5.The Circle Officer, Keredari Block, Hazaribagh . … Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Advocate Mr. Harsh Chandra, Advocate Mr. Surya Harsh Mishra, Advocate Mr. Shashank Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Kishore Kr. Singh, SC-V Mr. Krishna Prajapati, AC to SC-V Mr. P.C. Sinha, Advocate ------ 12/ 21.07.2026 Heard, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. In W.P.(C) No.3982 of 2021, prayer of the petitioner is to quash the order dated 23.04.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh in suspicious Jamabandi cancellation proposal Record No.43/2016-2017, whereby the jamabandi over the land situated at Village- Pandu, Block- Keredari, District Hazaribagh, Thana No.11, Khata No.110, Plot No.940, 452, 889 and other Plot, total Rakba- 3.36 acres and gair Manzurwa khas khata land in page no.203, zild no.II of 2026:JHHC:21453 2 register-II has been cancelled. 3. In W.P.(C) No.3435 of 2021, prayer of the petitioner is to quash the order dated 23.04.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh in suspicious Jamabandi cancellation proposal Record No.47/2016-2017, whereby the jamabandi over the land situated at Village- Pandu, Block- Keredari, District Hazaribagh, Thana No.11, Khata No.110, Plot No.452, Rakba- 0.26 acres and Plot No.638 rakwa 0.75 acres as well as plot no.1344, rakwa 0.25 acres totaling to 1.26 acres gair Manzurwa khas khata land in page no.207, zild no.II of register-II has been cancelled. 4. It is the case of the petitioners that the land in question has been settled with the petitioners by the then landlords vide Hukumnama. The entries were made in the old register of revenue records. 5. It is the case of the petitioners that they were occupying the same without any hinderance or interference from any person. 6. On 31.08.2013, the Additional Collector, Hazaribagh after making an enquiry, made a recommendation in favour of the petitioners that the petitioners are rightful claimant for payment of compensation in lieu of acquisition of the land by N.T.P.C. 7. It is further case of the petitioners that the Circle Officer, Keredari all of a sudden without any objection from any corner submitted a report before the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Sadar, Hazaribagh informing that in the column of the register there is neither any reference of any order nor the petitioners submitted any returns and the petitioners were neither found in possession over the land. The aforesaid report was given concurrence by the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Sadar, Hazaribagh and recommendation were made for cancelling the long standing jamabandi of the petitioners. Thereafter, the Suspicious Jamabandi Cancellation Proposal Record bearing 2026:JHHC:21453 3 Nos.43/2016-2017 & 47/2016-2017 were opened for cancellation of the suspicious jamabandi. The Deputy Commissioner thereafter vide the impugned orders cancelled the long running jamabandi holding, the same to be suspicious. The petitioners have challenged the same. 8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that so-called settlement in favour of the petitioners are dubious. He submits that petitioners were 4 to 5 years old at the time of settlement. There is no reference of any order or any permission to open the jamabandi in the name of the petitioners which creates doubt. 9. After hearing the parties, I find that it is an admitted case that the jamabandi were opened in the name of the petitioners. The jamabandi were opened in the year 1955. Just on the basis that there was no reference to any order in the Register-II and the fact that considering the age of the petitioners and as there is no land return filed, the long standing jamabandis have been cancelled. 10. It is now well settled proposition of law that a jamabandi which is running for quiet a considerable period cannot be cancelled by any administrative order that too, by the Revenue Authorities. In the case of State of Jharkhand, through the Chief Secretary & Others Vs. Izhar Hussain, reported in 2020 SCC OnLine Jhar 1978, a Division Bench of this court at paragraph 19 has held as under:- “19. ----------------- It is further settled position of law that Jamabandi once created cannot be annulled. Herein it is admitted fact that Jamabandi can be created under the provisions of Bihar Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973. We have gone across the provisions thereof, as contained in the Act, 1973 and have found that no provision confer upon any authority of the State to cancel the Jamabandi. The question would be that in absence of any power conferred by Statute upon any of the revenue authority can Jamabandi be cancelled. The answer of this question would be in negative as statute confers power upon the authority and the authority can purportedly exercise the power conferred upon it under the statutory power and if any decision is taken in absence of any provision the same would be said to be nullity in the eye of law when found to be without jurisdiction. It is further settled that long running Jamabandi cannot be cancelled, save and except by filing a suit before the competent Court of Civil Jurisdiction, as has been held by Hon’ble Apex Court in Ramayan Yadav & Ors Vs. State 2026:JHHC:21453 4 of Bihar & Ors reported in (2013) 3 PLJR 533. 11. Admittedly, the jamabandis were running from the year, 1955 from then the petitioners were enjoying the property in question. Admittedly, they were paying rent to the Government and they have exercised all their rights as the owner of the land. 12. Further, I find that the respondents are doubting the settlement in favour of the petitioners. If the settlement by the landlord is doubted or is against the provision of Bihar Land Reforms Act or has been undertaken to defeat the provisions of BLR Act, the remedy available to the State is under Section 4h of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, but in these cases the said provision was also not invoked by the State. 13. Considering what has been held above, the long running jamabandi in favour of the petitioners could not have been cancelled in any manner by the Deputy Commissioner. 14. Thus, the impugned orders dated 23.04.2017 passed by the Deputy Commissioner in Suspicious Jamabandi Cancellation Proposal Record No.47/2016-2017 and Suspicious Jamabandi Cancellation Proposal Record No.43/2016-2017 are hereby set aside. 15. Accordingly, these writ petitions are allowed with a liberty to the State to approach the Civil Court for right, title and interest of the property in question. Without approaching the Civil Court and without there being any order of the Civil Court, the long running jamabandi cannot be cancelled. 16. Pending I.A.(s), if any, stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 21st July, 2026 RS/SKC- Uploaded on 23/07/2026