While dealing with a case where buildings of the purchasers of the land or the flat owners situated over the acquired land, who have invested their hard-earned money, are demolished, the Jharkhand High Court (Ranchi Bench) lamented on the revenue authority/ the registering authority/ the map sanctioning authority/ and the RERA authority who are duty bound to have been vigilant at the time of either getting the land registered or getting the land mutated or issuance of non-incumbrance certificate or sanction of the map.
As unfortunately, none of the functionaries have discharged their duty in a proper manner for which they are deputed and have rather made the people suffer due to the demolition of their construction over the acquired Land, the High Court remarked that if these officials will not be penalized, then, such things will again happen in future and the innocent persons may be made to suffer like in the present instance. The Court therefore held that the residents, whose residences have/are being demolished, are entitled to be compensated.
The High Court, however, questioned why the State Exchequer should be made to bear the expenses of compensating the affected persons due to the illegality committed by the officials of the State, Municipal Corporation, etc., and why not the erring officials and the builders who have allowed the construction over the acquired Government Land or constructed the multi-storey buildings. Accordingly, the Court directed the State government to fix accountability on every official who is involved in the said malpractices and adequately compensate the residents/affected persons whose constructions have been demolished, which expenses, shall be borne by these erring officials and the builders.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad affirmed that once land is lawfully acquired and compensation is paid, it vests with the State. Any structure not belonging to RIMS on its acquired land is considered an encroachment, and subsequent transactions or issuance of revenue documents by authorities do not create a valid title in favour of the purchasers.
The Bench, however, expressed shock at the failure of various authorities who allowed illegal constructions on acquired government land. It noted the culpability of Revenue Authorities for manipulating records and issuing rent receipts, the Ranchi Municipal Corporation and RERA for sanctioning building plans, and banks for sanctioning loans without due diligence. The RIMS administration was also held ‘equally accountable’ for allowing the encroachment to continue unchecked.
The Bench accordingly directed the State Police to institute an FIR and ordered an investigation by the Anti-Corruption Bureau against the erring officials. It also directed that departmental proceedings be initiated against all officials involved in the illegal registration, mutation, and sanctioning of plans for the acquired land.
Briefly, the case addresses two primary issues: the illegal occupation of a government bungalow and large-scale encroachment on the land of the Rajendra Institute of Medical Science (RIMS). As far as the illegal occupation of ‘Kelly Bungalow’ is concerned, one Rakhee Nisha Oraon, an IRS Officer, was illegally occupying the Kelly Bungalow of RIMS, which was previously allotted to her husband, who had since been repatriated to his parent department in Himachal Pradesh. When Oraon herself had been repatriated from her deputation in Jharkhand to her parent department, the Central Board of Direct Taxes in New Delhi, a petition filed by her to retain the accommodation was dismissed. The Court, however, directed her to vacate the premises, failing which she would be forcibly evicted.
As far as encroachment on RIMS Land is concerned, the Court took cognisance of a report submitted by the Member Secretary of the Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority (JHALSA), which detailed significant encroachment on approximately 7-8 acres of land acquired for RIMS. The encroachments included temples, shops, multi-storied buildings, a park, residential houses and roads, which obstructed essential hospital services and posed safety and hygiene risks. The report highlighted that despite repeated notices, no comprehensive steps had been taken by the District Administration or the RIMS administration to remove these encroachments.
Appearances:
Advocates Saurav Arun, Deepak Kumar Dubey, and Rashi Sharma, for the Petitioner
AAG Sachin Kumar, Sr. SC Ashok Kumar Yadav, and Advocate Abhijeet Anand, for the State
Dr Ashok Kumar Singh, Nipun Bakshi, and Sharon Toppo, for the RIMS
Advocate Khalida Haya Rashmi, for the JSBCCL
Advocates Indrajit Sinha and Kashish Tiwary, as Amicus Curiae
Senior Advocate Ajit Kumar, for the Intervenor
