A Single Judge Bench of Justice Rajesh Shankar observed that the continued maintenance of the prohibited list was causing undue hardship to landowners, as Sub-Registrars were arbitrarily refusing to register valid sale deeds concerning properties included in the list.

The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by Amit Ranjan seeking directions to the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, to consider his application for removal of his 42-decimal land situated in village Bonga from the prohibited list maintained under Section 22-A of the Registration Act.

The petitioner submitted that despite making a representation seeking removal of his land from the list, the authorities had taken no action. Examining the issue, the High Court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Basant Nahata, which had struck down Section 22-A of the Registration Act as introduced by the Rajasthan Amendment Act, 1976, for violating Articles 14 and 246 of the Constitution.

The Bench also referred to the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Jharkhand HC in Chotanagpur Diocesan Trust Association, which had struck down Section 22-A as adopted by Jharkhand, along with Notification No. 1132 dated August 26, 2015. The Division Bench had relied upon the Supreme Court's ruling in Basant Nahata, noting that the provisions were identical.

Appearing for the State, the Advocate General submitted that two Special Leave Petitions challenging the Division Bench judgment dated May 1, 2025, were pending before the Supreme Court. However, the Court noted that no interim order had been passed in either proceeding. The State also submitted that it was in the process of introducing a new law concerning the issue. The High Court held that, in the meantime, the State could not continue acting upon the notification and statutory provision that had already been struck down.

The Bench observed that despite the earlier judgment, the prohibited list continued to appear on the NGDRS portal, resulting in Sub-Registrars refusing registration of sale deeds and numerous aggrieved landowners approaching the High Court. The Court further clarified that registration of a sale deed does not itself establish valid ownership or cure defects in the seller's title. However, the registering authority has no adjudicatory power to determine title disputes and cannot refuse registration merely because the property's ownership is disputed, provided the requirements of the Registration Act and Bihar Registration Rules, 1937, are satisfied.

The State suggested that affected landowners should individually approach the Deputy Commissioners of their respective districts for removal of their properties from the list. Rejecting this contention, the Court observed:

“I do not find any substance in the said submission of learned Advocate General since Section 22-A of the Act, 1908 as well as the notification dated 26.8.2015 have already been struck down by learned Division Bench of this Court and there is no reason to relegate the petitioner or other similarly situated persons to individually request the executive authorities for this purpose.”

The Bench further noted that the State had unilaterally included the petitioner's land and other properties in the prohibited list on the ground of public policy without giving the affected persons an opportunity of hearing. It observed that preventing a person from transferring land had severe civil consequences, requiring compliance with the principles of natural justice.

Accordingly, the High Court directed the State to forthwith delete the prohibited list of lands maintained on the NGDRS portal. It also directed Sub-Registrars throughout Jharkhand to register deeds of transfer that conform to the Registration Act, 1908, and the Bihar Registration Rules, 1937.

The writ petition was accordingly disposed of.

Appearance:

For the Petitioner: Mr. Himanshu Harsh, Advocate; Mr. Shresth Gautam, Advocate

For the Respondents: Mr. Rohitashya Roy, Advocate General; Mr. Tarun Kumar Mahato, AC to AG