Petitioners lacking rights over specified dags cannot challenge eviction notice; revenue records must be supplied on application.

The petitioners challenged the Circle Officer’s notice dated 19 April 2022, which stated that encroachers over Dag Nos. 164 and 131 at village Magurmari would be evicted on 27 April 2022 in favour of beneficiaries under the MNP/TB Scheme.

The petitioners relied on registered sale deeds executed in favour of their predecessors-in-interest, but the schedules in those deeds concerned Dag No. 128 of Khatian No. 2 and Dag No. 135 under Myadi Patta No. 1, rather than Dag Nos. 164 and 131 referred to in the impugned notice.

A BTC report stated that Dag No. 164 was Government khas land measuring 1 Bigha 3 Kathas 6 Lechas, over which Basanti Das and the predecessors-in-interest of the petitioners had been in possession.

Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 claimed that they had been allotted land under the MNP Scheme and had been placed in possession in 2022.

The petitioners also sought the sketch/trace map and Jamabandi concerning the lands covered by Dag Nos. 128 and 135, which had not been supplied by the authorities.

Whether the petitioners had established a legally cognisable right or interest in Dag Nos. 164 and 131 sufficient to sustain a challenge to the eviction notice dated 19 April 2022.

Whether the petitioners were entitled to obtain the trace map and Jamabandi relating to the lands covered by Dag No. 128 of Khatian No. 2 and Dag No. 135 under Myadi Patta No. 1, upon payment of the prescribed fees.

The Court applied the principle that a writ challenge to an administrative eviction notice cannot be sustained unless the petitioner demonstrates a legally recognisable right, title, or interest in the land specifically covered by the notice.

It further distinguished between the lands described in the petitioners’ sale deeds and the lands identified in the impugned notice; documents relating to different dags could not, without supporting material, establish a right over the notified land.

The Court also recognised the petitioners’ entitlement to obtain revenue records, including the Jamabandi and trace map, on application and payment of the prescribed fee, and directed the concerned authorities to provide those records within the stipulated period.

No specific statutory provision or judicial precedent was cited in the judgment.

The Court found that the sale deeds relied upon by the petitioners related to Dag Nos. 128 and 135, whereas the impugned eviction notice concerned Dag Nos. 164 and 131.

Consequently, those deeds did not substantiate any right of the petitioners over the land identified in the notice.

The available revenue material described Dag No. 164 as Government khas land, and the petitioners failed to place before the Court sufficient material demonstrating a legally enforceable interest in Dag Nos. 164 or 131.

The Court therefore declined to interfere with the eviction notice.

However, because the petitioners had sought revenue records relating to Dag Nos. 128 and 135—lands corresponding to the schedules in their sale deeds—the Court directed the authorities to furnish the requested trace map and Jamabandi upon proper application and payment of the prescribed fee.

The concerned authorities, particularly Respondent Nos. 5 and 7, were directed to provide the trace map and Jamabandi relating to the land covered by Dag No. 135 under Myadi Patta No. 1 and Dag No. 128 of Khatian No. 2, upon submission of complete applications and payment of the prescribed fees.

The direction was to be complied with within two months from the submission of the applications.