STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS. versus PAKUR JAGRAN MANCH & ORS.

Citation: [2011] 1 S.C.R. 687 · Decided: 12-01-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.V. RAVEENDRAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2011) 1 S.C.R. 687 
STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS. 
A 
. --' 
v . 
PAKUR JAGRAN MANCH & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 436 of 2011) 
JANUARY 12, 2011 
8 
[R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND H.L. GOKHALE, JJ.] 
Santhal Parganas Settlement Regulations, 1872 -
Regulations. 24 and 25 - De-reserve or de-notify gochar 
(village grazing land) - Power of State Government - Record c 
of rights whereby certain land recorded as Gochar, village 
grazing land - Identification of the said land as suitable for 
construction of hospital - Notification by State Government 
de-notifying and releasing Gochar land and in its place 
declaring Gairmajarua (Government) Khas land as Gochar -
o . 
•'\' 
. Writ petition seeking prohibition of construction of hospital in 
the said gochar, allowed by High Court -· On appeal held: 
Land recorded as a gochar in the record-of-rights of a village 
in pursuance of a settlement under the Regulations, can be 
re-opened and altered at any time, without waiting for the next 
E 
settlement, with the previous sanction of the State Government 
- On facts, Deputy Commissioner, authority empowered to re-
~~ 
open the record-of-rights for de-reserving the land recorded 
as gochar, made a proposal seeking the sanction of the State 
Government, for de-reserving the gochar - State Government 
F 
by the Notification granted approval for de-reservation and. 
earmarked alternative land as gochar - Notification has to be 
read as an order granting re-opening of the final record of 
rights of the village for the purpose of de-reserving the gochar 
for constructing a hospital for the public purpose and the same 
G 
c-i 
was consented to by the village headman and all Jamabandi 
Raiyats - Thus, Notification is valid - Order of High Court is 
set aside and the hospital is allowed to function in ex-gochar 
land -
Santhan Parganas Tenancy (Supplementary 
687 
H 
688 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 1 S.C.R. 
A Provisions) Act, 1949 - s. 38 (2). 
Santhan Parganas Tenancy (Supplementary Provisions) 
Act, 1949: 
s. 2(1) -
Scope of -
Held: De-reservation or re-
B categorisation of a land recorded as gochar in the record-of-
rights is not within the scope of the Act -s. 2(1) cannot be 
treated as the source of power to issue a Notification de-
reserving gochar. 
c 
s. 38 - Grazing land shall not be cultivated - Prohibition 
uls. 38(1), in regard to non-grazing use - Applicability of -
Held: If the land is not recorded as gochar or village grazing 
land, or if the land ceases to be shown as gochar or village 
grazing land in the Record-of-Rights for valid reasons, bar ul 
0 
s. 38(1) would not apply. 
Practice and Procedure - Omission to refer provision of 
law which is the source of power, or mentioning of a wrong 
provision - Held: Would not by itself render the government 
order invalid or illegal, if government had the power under an 
E appropriate provision of law 
The Settlement Officer notified a land measuring 4.40 
acres as Gochar, village grazing land (Plot no. 1061). In 
pursuance to the order of the High Court for 
F implementation of health programme, the said gochar 
was identified as being suitable for construction of the 
hospital with the consent of village headman and 
community. The first respondent filed a writ petition 
seeking prohibition .of construction of a hospital in the 
G said gochar. Subsequently, the State Government issued 
a Notification dated 31.5.2007 de-notifying and releasing 
4.44 acres of gochar land and declared 4.44 acres of 
Gairmajarua (Government) khas land (Plot Nos. 62, 199 
and 427) as gochar land. In the Writ Petition, the High 
H Court held th~t the State had no authority to construct a 
• 
i-· 
-
STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS. v. PAKUR JAGRAN 689 
MANCH & ORS. 
nospital in the land earmarked as Gochar meant for A 
./ 
grazing catties; and that the Notification de-notifying and 
releasing Gochar for construction of a hospital was not 
valid. Therefore, the appellants filed the instant appeals. 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
B 
HELD: 1. Sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Santhal 
Pargansas Tenancy (Supplementary Provisions) Act, 
-( 
1949 enables the State Government to re-organise or 
delimit any portion of the Santhal Parganas Division for c 
convenient revenue administration. De-reserving certain 
land which has been recorded as gochar in the record-
of-rights in pursuance of a settlement under the 
Settlement Regulations, has nothing to do ,with 
withdrawing the applicability of the 1949 Act or anv part
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.