2026:JHHC:11904 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 4833 of 2022 1. Lal Chandika Nath Shahdeo, Aged about 46 years 2. Lal Bhawani Shankar Nath Shahdeo Aged about 51 years Both sons of Late Prafull Nath Shahdeo and residents of At & P.O.: Ginjo, Thakurgaon, P.S.:Burmu, District: Ranchi. ... … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, P.O.: G.P.O., P.S.: Kotwali, Town & District: Ranchi. 2. The Addl. Collector, Ranchi, P.O.: G.P.O., P.S. Kotwali, Town & District: Ranchi. 3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Ranchi, P.O.: G.P.O., P.S. Kotwali, Town & District: Ranchi. 4. The Circle Officer, Burmu, P.O. & P.S.: Burmu, District: Ranchi. ... … Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner(s) :M/s. Sudhir Kr. Sharma, Ram Prakash Singh, Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi, Advocates For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Mishra, G.P-V M/s. Varsha Ramsisaria, Aditi Dangrawat, A.C to G.P.-V -------- C.A.V on 19/03/2026 Pronounced on 21/04/2026 The present writ application has been filed for the following reliefs:- “For issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions, commanding upon & directing the respondents, particularly the Respondent No. 4 (Circle Officer, Burmu) to issue up- to-date rent receipt with respect to land-in-question, more fully described in Para 5, after making Online Entry, for which the petitioner no. 1 was issued notice dated 02.04.2022, vide Suspicious Demand Case No. 1422/2021-22 and was directed to appear along with documents on 23rd April, 2022, at about 11 A.M. and explain why the Jamabandi may not be cancelled, treating the same as suspicious, to which the petitioner has already filed reply dated 23.04.2022 and furnished original documents before Respondent no.4 on 15/7/2022.” 2. The land in question appertains to Mauza: Binja, Anchal: Burmu, P.S.: Burmu, P.S. No. 34, District: Ranchi, Khata No. 102, Volume 2026:JHHC:11904 2 No. 01, Page No. 122, details of Plots & Area are as under:- Plot No. Area (in acre) 12 0.71 38 2.34 72 0.13 31 0.23 76 0.08 46 1.63 101 0.23 123 0.41 170 1.61 121 0.10 138 0.23 112 0.99 113 0.08 153 1.70 162 2.14 163 6.96 180 0.06 184 0.45 260 0.16 264 0.07 265 0.18 1784 0.20 1406 1.48 1835 2.57 1787 2.56 Total 27.30 (Twenty Seven) 3. From pleadings, following fact emerges: - (i) The land in question stood recorded in the records of right under Khata No. 102, Thana No. 34, Mouza Binja in the name of ex-landlord, namely, Lal Chandra Mohan Nath Shahdeo as “Gair Mazurua Khas”. Ex-landlord Lal Chandra Mohan Nath Shahdeo settled land in question in the name of father of the petitioners, namely, Lal Prafulla Nath Shahdeo on payment of Nazrana Salami of Rs. 300/- vide Hukumnama dated 31.03.1945 (Records of right has been brought on record vide Annexure-1 to the writ petition). After the settlement, the father of the petitioners, namely, Lal Prafulla Nath Shahdeo came in possession over land in question and paid rent to ex-landlord in lieu of grant of rent receipt. (ii) After vesting of Zamindari, erstwhile Government of Bihar recognized Lal Prafulla Nath Shahdeo as raiyat and rent was paid in his name till the year 1990 (Hukumnama, Zamindari Receipt, Government Receipt have been brought on record as Annexure-2 Series to the writ petition). Father of the petitioners, namely, Lal Prafulla Nath Shahdeo could not make payment of rent for the land in question after the year 1990 and same fell due. On 17.12.2001, father of the petitioners died. (iii) On 9.10.2015 and subsequently on 25.11.2017, the petitioners made request to Circle Officer, Burmu for issuing rent receipt for land in question. On 2026:JHHC:11904 3 05.01.2022, petitioner no. 1 made request to Circle Officer, Burmu that for land in question; rent receipt has been issued till 1990 and has been forwarded in online Register-II, Vol. No. I, Page No. 1/2 showing only one Khata No. 102, area 27.30 Acres. Petitioner No. 1 requested Circle Officer that after death of their father, petitioners are in cultivating possession over the land in question and further requested the Circle Officer that online rent receipt for land in question may be issued after making online entry of plots in Register-II. (iv) Thereafter, the Petitioner No. 1 received notice dated 02.04.2022 issued by Circle Officer, Burmu in Suspicious/Illegal Jamabandi Case No. 1422/2021- 22; whereby he was informed that Jamabandi running for the land in question appears to be suspicious and directed him to appear on 23.04.2022 and explain how the land in question was acquired by him or his ancestors and why Jamabandi may not be cancelled as being suspicious. Pursuant to aforesaid notice, petitioner appeared and filed his reply; however, no action has been taken to issue the rent receipt. Hence this writ application. 4. It has been submitted by Ld. counsel for the petitioners that on 23.04.2022, petitioner appeared before the Circle Officer, Burmu and filed his detailed reply. He had submitted that after vesting of Zamindari, Lal Prafulla Nath Shahdeo was recognized as a tenant and made payment to the Government in lieu of grant of rent receipt. Further, the settlement on 31.03.1945 is prior to 1st day January, 1946 and does not require any enquiry under section 4(h) of Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950. 5. Ld. Counsel further contended that Jamabandi running in the name of father of the petitioners is a long standing Jamabandi and cannot be cancelled. He further submits that on 19.02.2022, enquiry was also made by Circle Inspector, Revenue Karmchari and Government Amin, who found the petitioners in possession and accordingly details of plot have already been recorded in Online Register-II in the name of Prafulla Nath Shahdeo. He contended that the petitioners also requested Circle Officer, Burmu that rent receipt may be issued for land in question after making all entries on the basis of documents submitted with the reply and spot enquiry already made in this regard (Reply dated 23.04.2022, Online Register-II and details of land in question are annexed as Annexure-5 Series to the writ application). 2026:JHHC:11904 4 Ld. Counsel further contended that despite the petitioners were found in possession in spot inspection conducted by revenue authorities on 19.02.2022 and same was entered in Online Register-II, shown name of Prafulla Nath Shahdeo for the land in question; no online rent receipt was issued. 6. Ld. Counsel for the respondents after relying to its counter affidavit dated 12.12.2022 denied the claim of the petitioners mainly on the ground that the petitioners' claim is based on unregistered Hukumnama, which is valued of more than Rs. 300/- and as such, the same was compulsorily registerable. The State also took stand that Hukumnama is not accompanied with continuous rent receipt. The petitioners are not in possession over land in question, inasmuch as, there exists a school and a weekly Haat is organised in the part of the land in question. Respondent-State annexed Khatiyan showing details of land in question in the name of Lal Chandra Mohan Nath Shahdeo and claimed that nature of land in question is Parti Gaddha, Parti Kadim, Parti Patthar. 7. It has been stated that Circle Officer vide order dated 28.09.2022 passed in suspicious Jamabandi Case No. 1422 of 2021-22 has found Jamabandi suspicious and made recommendation for cancellation to L.R.D.C., Ranchi. The respondent-State brought on record Register-II (Annexure-C to the counter affidavit) showing name of Lal Prafulla Nath Shahdeo; however, stated that Register-II does not show order of competent authority. 8. The petitioners filed rejoinder on 24.01.2023 to the counter affidavit dated 12.12.2022 denying the contentions made in the counter affidavit and reiterated that ex-landlord had settled land in question to Lal Prafulla Nath Shahdeo by virtue of Hukumnama dated 31.03.1945 and thereafter he remained in possession and paid rent in lieu of grant of rent receipts and after vesting of Zamindari, Lal Prafulla Nath Shahdeo was recognized as a tenant by the erstwhile Government of Bihar and he made payment to the Government in lieu of grant of rent receipts. The 2026:JHHC:11904 5 Jamabandi running in the name of the father of petitioners is a long standing Jamabandi and cannot be cancelled in a summary proceeding. Ld. Counsel reiterated that the settlement on 31.03.1945 is prior to the appointed date i.e. 01.01.1946, hence, institution of proceeding under Section 4(h) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 read with Letter No. 95/2015 dated 13.05.2015 issued by the Department of Land Reforms being suspicious Jamabandi Case No.1422/21-22 is bad in law. Petitioners also pointed out that Circle Officer, Burmu without proper appreciation of the documents submitted by the petitioners only in mechanical fashion has made recommendation for cancellation of long standing Jamabandi running in the name of father of the petitioners, which has no sanctity in the eyes of law. The petitioners also pointed out that after deducting portion of the land over which a weekly Haat used to be organized during Covid-19 period, Online Register-II has been prepared in the name of father of the petitioners. The petitioners are in cultivating possession over the land in question, which the revenue authority also found while spot inspection dated 19.02.2022 and on the basis of same, online entry in Register-II was made. The petitioners also stated in rejoinder that Register-II (Annexure-C to the counter affidavit) bears signature of competent authority and denied that Jamabandi is suspicious. 9. Thereafter, respondents also filed supplementary counter affidavit dated 17.02.2025 and brought on record the judgement dated 09.04.2024 passed by this Court in L.P.A. No. 318 of 2022 with other analogous cases to show similarity of issues involved in the present writ application with L.P.A. No. 318 of 2022 with analogous cases decided by this Court vide order dated 9.4.2024. In the said affidavit, the respondent-State has also stated that they intend to file civil suit for which they have prayed for approval before the competent authority. 10. Thereafter, petitioners filed rejoinder dated 18.03.2025 and denied that issues involved in the present writ application and L.P.A. 2026:JHHC:11904 6 No.318 of 2022 with analogous case are same. In the rejoinder the petitioners stated that serious allegation of forgery and fabrication of revenue record of Village-Pundag were involved in L.P.A. No. 318 of 2022 and analogous cases decided by this Court vide order dated 09.04.2024. There is no allegation of forgery with revenue record or any claim of private respondents with respect to the land in question which is the subject matter of present writ application. The petitioners also pointed out that in L.P.A. No. 231 of 2022 Jamabandi was cancelled under Section 4(h) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act. However, in the present writ application the long standing Jamabandi running in the name of father of the petitioners and after spot enquiry possession of the petitioners over land in question has been found and online entry in Register-II barring 9 decimal of land over which school building in a dilapidated condition exists has already been made. 11. Having heard learned counsel for the rival parties and after going through the documents annexed with the respective affidavits it appears that petitioners are in cultivating possession over the land in question and in spot enquiry conducted by Halka Karmchari, Circle Inspector on 19.02.2022, their possession over land in question barring 9 decimals over which school in dilapidated condition exists, was found and accordingly entry in Online Register-II was made. 12. It is further evident from records that the Ex-landlord, namely, Lal Chandra Mohan Nath Shahdeo had made settlement in the name of Lal Prafulla Nath Shahdeo by virtue of Hukumnama dated 31.03.1945 and thereafter Settlee has come in possession over the land in question and made payment of rent to the ex-landlord in lieu of grant of rent receipt. After vesting of Zamindari, erstwhile Government of Bihar has also recognized father of the petitioners, namely, Lal Prafulla Nath Shahdeo as tenant and he paid rent to the Government in lieu of grant of rent receipt. It appears that the father of the petitioners died in the year 2001 and rent could not be paid for few years. Thereafter, the Petitioners 2026:JHHC:11904 7 requested Circle Officer, Burmu to accept rent for land in question and grant rent receipt; however, instead of regularizing the Jamabandi and issuing rent receipt, suspicious Jamabandi Case No. 1422/2021-22 was instituted and notice was issued to the petitioners vide notice dated 02.04.2022, which was wholly without jurisdiction and bad in law. 13. The Division Bench of this Court in “State of Jharkhand Vrs. Izhar Hussain”1 has held that there is no statutory provision under the provisions of Bihar Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973 for cancelling a long standing Jamabandi, which has attained finality after dismissal of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 8108 of 2021 filed by State of Jharkhand. For brevity, relevant paragraph of aforesaid judgement is quoted herein below: “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 of Bihar & Ors reported in (2013) 3 PLJR 533. 25. We, on appreciation of the findings recorded by the learned Single Judge and on the basis of discussions made herein above, are of the view that there is no reason to differ with the view/opinion of the learned Single Judge, by coming to the conclusion that the order dated 09.09.2016 passed by the revenue authorities is illegal and not sustainable in the eyes of law, as they have exercised power conferred under section 4(h) of the Act, 1950 which as per the discussions made herein above has been found to be not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case as the case of the writ petitioner is that he is claiming title over the land in question on the basis of settlement made prior to 1st January, 1946 and further the additional Collector by way of order passed in Misc. Case No. 56/2015-16 has already passed order on 17.03.2016 holding therein that the present raiyats i.e Izhar Hussain and Akhtar Hussain are the recorded raiyats of Register-II in Thoka (Lot) No. 1665 which is absolutely correct and proper. But without questioning and without reversal of that order, a fresh proceeding was initiated under Section 4(h) of the Act, 1950 and further long running Jamabandi cannot be cancelled, save and except by instituting a litigation before the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. Hence, the order passed by the learned Single Judge cannot be faulted with. (Emphasis supplied) 1 2022 (3) JLJR 249 2026:JHHC:11904 8 14. Further, this Court in “Anil Kumar Bajaj v. State of Jharkhand & Ors.” 2 has categorically held that once a Jamabandi has been created, the State cannot deny acceptance of rent and issuance of rent receipt. In the case in hand; the Jamabandi is still running in the name of the father of the petitioners and he had paid rent to the State in lieu of grant of rent receipt and State is duty bound to accept rent and grant rent receipt. The petitioners are entitled for issuance of up-to-date rent receipt with respect to land in question after making online entry. 15. In view of the aforesaid finding, this Court holds that the initiation of suspicious Jamabandi Case No. 1422/2021-22 is bad in law, and the same has no legs to stand in the eye of law; accordingly, any action in suspicious Jamabandi Case No. 1422/2021-22 would be in nullity. 16. As a result, this writ application is allowed. Respondent No. 4 (Circle Officer, Burmu) is directed to issue up-to-date rent receipt with respect to land-in-question, more fully described in Para 2 of this order, after making Online Entry. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated 21/04/2026 Amit Uploaded on 24/04/2026 N.A.F.R 2 W.P.(C) No. 3471/2022