The Patna High Court has held former Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar entitled to compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, for land acquired by the Bihar government in 1976, ruling that the Collector lacked jurisdiction to cancel the land’s revenue records without establishing that the property had vested in the State.
Justice Khatim Reza passed the order while hearing Kumar’s writ petition, which had been remanded for reconsideration by a Division Bench in view of subsequent proceedings initiated to cancel the jamabandi,the revenue record reflecting the landholding.
The dispute relates to 18 kathas and 10 dhurs of land, measuring approximately 0.56 acres, situated in Mainpura, Patna. The State acquired the property in 1976 under the Bengal Embankment Act, 1882, for the construction of a drain. Although the construction was completed, compensation remained unpaid to the original owner, Indrani Devi, Kumar’s mother, who died in 2002, as well as to Kumar.
During the pendency of the litigation, the Patna Collector, through an order dated April 12, 2023, cancelled the jamabandi relating to the disputed land in the name of Kumar, her mother and others. The order was passed in proceedings under Section 4(h) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, and also directed the removal of encroachment from the property.
The High Court examined the statutory scheme governing the Collector’s powers and held that Section 4(h) could not be invoked independently of the provisions under which an estate vests in the State. The provision enables the Collector to inquire into specified transfers made after January 1, 1946, where they were intended to defeat the land reforms legislation, cause loss to the estate or secure undue compensation.
However, the Bench clarified that the power to annul such transfers is contingent upon the prior establishment of vesting under the principal provisions of the Act.
The Court found that the State had failed to produce any notification under Sections 3 or 3A of the Bihar Land Reforms Act demonstrating that the disputed land had vested in it. The relevant return, which could have clarified the status of the property, was also not placed before the Court.
The Bench further noted that the Collector had relied on a cadastral survey entry describing the land as “Ghairmazarua Aam Pichhali Nadi”. It observed that such an entry, by itself, could not establish title to the property.
In contrast, the record indicated that Indrani Devi had purchased the land in 1941, before the statutory cut-off date of January 1, 1946. This was supported by a report prepared by a three-member committee constituted by the Collector himself.
The High Court also took into account the longstanding jamabandi maintained in favour of Indrani Devi and the fact that the State had accepted rent in respect of the land. It held that the Collector could not use summary revenue proceedings to annul the established revenue record without the requisite jurisdictional foundation.
The Bench observed that if the State wished to challenge the pre-1946 title or settlement, it would have to pursue an appropriate remedy before a competent civil court rather than seek cancellation through proceedings under Section 4(h).
Holding the Collector’s order to be without jurisdiction, the Court set aside the April 12, 2023 decision and directed restoration of the jamabandi in favour of Indrani Devi.
On the compensation claim, the Court considered whether the amount payable for the 1976 acquisition was governed by the earlier land acquisition regime or the 2013 Act. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal, it considered the consequences of non-payment of compensation under Section 24(2) of the 2013 legislation.
The High Court ultimately held that Kumar was entitled to compensation under the 2013 Act for the acquired land.
The writ petition was accordingly allowed, with the Collector’s cancellation order quashed, the jamabandi restored and Kumar’s entitlement to compensation under the 2013 law recognised.
The post Patna High Court sets aside cancellation of Meira Kumar’s land records, holds her entitled to compensation under 2013 Act appeared first on India Legal.