IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.W.J.C. No.2333 of 2010 Arun Kumar, Advocate & Ors Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ---------------------------------- 06. 03.08.2011 Heard Mr. Yogendra Prasad Mishra, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Vishwajeet Kumar Mishra, learned Assisting counsel to G.A. 9 for the State. The petitioners 10 in number have questioned the order dated 16.1.2010 passed by the District Magistrate- cum-Collector, Araria as contained in Annexure-14 to the writ petition directing the Revenue authorities to make enquiry as regarding the transactions/sale made by the settlee with regard to the land settled in their favour by the Government and for taking appropriate measures for cancellation of the sale deeds and transactions entered into between the settlees and purchasers. The petitioners herein are purchasers of land which were originally in the nature of Kewat land and which vested in the State under the provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950. The predecessor-in-interest in these lands had been occupation of the same since much before the vesting of the intermediaries rights in the year 1950. In the year 1955, the predecessors in interest having been found in possession, the lands were settled with them, inter alia, on grounds that these occupants belonged to the Scheduled Caste 2 category. It is not in dispute that by passage of time the original settlees disposed of their land and whereafter the present petitioners came into possession of the same being purchasers from the said settlee. The land in question is admeasuring 61 acres. It so appears that the Collector upon an enquiry and survey being made by the revenue authorities came to a conclusion that almost all the original settlees had sold their land by way of registered sale deed without obtaining the permission of the Collector. It is in these circumstances that the impugned order dated 16.1.2010 has been passed by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Araria directing the revenue authorities to conduct an enquiry and to cancel all the sale deeds on the basis of which the original settles had sold their land to the present petitioners. It is in these circumstances that the present writ petition came to be filed. Learned counsel for the petitioners with reference to a full bench judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Bhageran Thakur Vs. Kewal Singh & Ors. reported in 1969 P.L.J.R. 30, submits that a similar restriction put under the statutory provision of Section 49(C) of the Bihar Tenancy Act requiring the settlees to obtain permission from the Collector before disposing of the land, was declared ultra vires by a full bench of this Court. He thus submits that any interference by the respondent District Magistrate-cum- 3 Collector requiring the original settlees to obtain permission from the Collector, would be in the teeth of full bench judgment and thus unsustainable. He submits that a right is vested in the land owner to dispose of the land on his own volition and any interference with the same would be violative of the rights guaranteed under the Constitution. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent Circle Officer who reinforces the opinion of the Collector relying upon a Circular of the State Government dated 24.5.1974. It is sought to be canvassed that by virtue of the said Circular the respondent District Magistrate-cum- Collector was well within his right to put a curb on the disposal of land settled with the original settlees and that it is in this back ground that the impugned action had been taken by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Araria. Apart from the fact that a similar restriction has been declared ultra vires by a full bench judgment of this Court, the Circular in question, relied upon by the respondent Collector, Araria, in no matter affects the right of the settlees in disposing of the land in the manner they so like. A plain reading of the circular manifest that it seeks to cover future settlements by inserting a specific clause in the deed of settlement restricting future transfer without obtaining the permission of the Collector of the district. It is not the case of the State respondent that these settlement had taken place 4 subsequent to the invocation of the Circular dated 24.5.1974. On the contrary, it is specific case of the petitioners that the entire chunk of land measuring about 61 acres was settled with the members of the Scheduled Caste community way back in the year 1955 and which position has not been controverted by the State respondents. That being the position the Circular dated 24.5.1974 in no manner can be made applicable to a settlement which had taken place almost 20 years ago in the year 1955. Apart from the said position, the action of the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Araria in interfering with the rights of the settlees in disposing of the lands settled in their favour would be in the teeth of the full bench judgment rendered in the case of Bhageran Thakur Vs. Kewal Singh & Ors. (supra). In the result, the order of the Collector cum District Magistrate, Araria as contained in the Memo No. 154 dated 16.1.2010 placed at Annexure-14 of the writ petition cannot be sustained and is accordingly quashed and set aside. The writ petition is allowed. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)