THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM: GANGTOK
(Civil Extra Ordinary Jurisdiction)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SINGLE BENCH: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN, JUDGE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W.P. (C) No. 55 of 2022
1. Shri Netra Kumar Pradhan,
S/o Late Ganesh Kumar Pradhan,
R/o Changeylakha, Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim-737 131.
2. Smt. Renuka Pradhan,
W/o Netra Kumar Pradhan,
R/o Changeylakha, Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim-737 131.
3. Shri. Dambar Kumar Pradhan,
S/o Late Ganesh Kumar Pradhan,
R/o Changeylakha, Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim-737 131.
4. Smt. Sita Pradhan,
W/o Dambar Kumar Pradhan,
R/o Changeylakha, Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim-737 131.
5. Shri Narendra Kumar Pradhan,
S/o Late Devi Bahadur Pradhan,
R/o Rongli Bazaar, Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim-737 131.
6. Shri Krishna Kumar Pradhan,
S/o Naerndra Kumar Pradhan,
R/o Rongli Bazar, Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim-737 131.
7. Shri Dilip Kumar Pradhan,
S/o Narendra Kumar Pradhan,
R/o Rongli Bazar, Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim-737 131.
8. Smt Chandra Kala Pradhan,
W/o Dilip Kumar Pradhan,
R/o Rongli Bazar Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim-737 131.
2
W. P. (C) No. 55 of 2022
Netra Kumar Pradhan & Ors. vs. District Collector & Ors.
9. Shri Rabin Kumar Pradhan,
S/o Narendra Kumar Pradhan,
R/o Rongli Bazar, Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim-737 131.
10. Smt Geeta Pradhan,
W/o Rabin Kumar Pradhan,
R/o Rongli Bazar, Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim-737 131.
11. Shri Rajesh Pradhan
S/o Narendra Kumar Pradhan,
R/o Rongli Bazar, Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim-737 131.
Petitioners
…..
Versus
1. The District Collector,
Office of the District Collectorate,
Gangtok 737 101
East Sikkim.
2. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate,
Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim. 737 131.
3. Shri Benu Prasad Sharma,
S/o Rudra Prasad Sharma,
R/o Cangeylakha, Rongli Sub-Division,
East Sikkim- 737 131.
Respondents
…..
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of
India.
(Impugned Orders dated 01.07.2019, 26.06.2020, 05.04.2022 and
19.09.2022 passed by the District Collector, East Sikkim, learned Sub-
Divisional Magistrate, East Sikkim, learned Appellate Authority, Land
Revenue and Disaster Management Department, and learned Appellate
Authority, Land Revenue and Disaster Management Department).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance:
Mr. B. Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sajal
Sharma, Ms. Shreya Sharma, Ms. Puja Kumari, Ms.
Sweta Karki and Ms. Roshni Chettri, Advocates for the
Petitioners.
3
W. P. (C) No. 55 of 2022
Netra Kumar Pradhan & Ors. vs. District Collector & Ors.
Mr. Zangpo Sherpa, Additional Advocate General and
Mr. Yadev Sharma, Government Advocate for the
Respondent Nos. 1 & 2.
None for the Respondent No.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of hearing : 06.03.2024
Date of Order : 06.03.2024
O R D E R (ORAL)
Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J.
1. The present writ petition assails the Order dated
01.07.2019 passed by the District Collector-respondent
no.1 cancelling the Certificate of Identification (COI) of the
petitioners. It also challenges the notice dated 26.06.2020
issued by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate-respondent no.2
stating that the petitioners had been given two months time
to sell their landed properties and submit the status report.
The Order of the Appellate Authority dated 05.04.2022
rejecting the appeal preferred by the petitioners on the
ground that the delay in preferring the appeal of 819 days
could not be condoned is also under challenge. The
petitioners also challenges the Order dated 19.09.2022 by
which review sought of the Order dated 05.04.2022 passed
by the Appellate Authority was also rejected.
2. This litigation has a chequered history. On
27.07.2005 a complaint was filed by the respondent no.3
against some of the petitioners for cancellation of their COI.
On 11.01.2006 the respondent no.2 held that the COI of
4
W. P. (C) No. 55 of 2022
Netra Kumar Pradhan & Ors. vs. District Collector & Ors.
those petitioners had not been fraudulently obtained.
Thereafter, Educated Unemployment Youth of Regu seem
to have filed another complaint. An inquiry was initiated
once again by the respondent no.2 on 28.09.2005 which
culminated in the respondent no.2 on 11.01.2006 holding
that the COI of the petitioner no.5 and his family members
are genuine.
3. The respondent no.3 seems to have filed yet
another complaint against some of the petitioners and on
30.10.2006 the respondent no.1 cancelled the COI of
Ganesh Kumar Pradhan and petitioner nos. 1 to 4. The
respondent no.1 also directed the cancellation of land
records/parcha issued in respect of Ganesh Kumar
Pradhan issued on the basis of false COI with a further
direction that Ganesh Kumar Pradhan may be given an
opportunity to sell his land to a person having valid Sikkim
Subject Certificate within a period of one month. By yet
another Order dated 07.08.2008 the other petitioner s COI
’
were also cancelled by the respondent no.1.
4. The petitioners thereafter, approached this Court
by filing Writ Petition (C) No. 40 of 2010 challenging the
Orders dated 30.10.2006 and 07.08.2008 passed by the
respondent no.1. The plea that the reports of the Special
Branch Sikkim Police and the Vigilance Department
5
W. P. (C) No. 55 of 2022
Netra Kumar Pradhan & Ors. vs. District Collector & Ors.
against them had not been furnished before passing
impugned Orders dated 30.10.2006 and 07.08.2008 was
accepted by this Court. Accordingly the impugned Orders
were set aside without examining the merits of the case
remitting it to the Competent Authority with a direction to
furnish the copies of the reports and hold a fresh inquiry.
Thereafter, the respondent no.1 after examining the matter
afresh cancelled the COI of petitioner nos. 1 to 11 and
Ganesh Kumar Pradhan.
5. The respondent no.2 was also directed to
scrutinize all land transactions done using the COI of the
petitioners and initiate proceedings as the transfer of
property was based on the COI which were cancelled.
6. The petitioners on legal advice received however, filed
a civil suit after issuance of a legal notice. Although this
legal notice is dated 18.02.2019 the learned Senior Counsel
for the petitioners submits that it was a typographical error
and it ought to have been 18.02.2020. The civil suit
however, was rejected under Order VII Rule 11 (d) of the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 on the ground that the
petitioners ought to have approached the Secretary, Land
Revenue and Disaster Management Department by filing an
appeal against the Order dated 01.07.2019 as provided in
Notification No. 119/Home/2010 dated 26.10.2010.
6
W. P. (C) No. 55 of 2022
Netra Kumar Pradhan & Ors. vs. District Collector & Ors.
7. It was only thereafter, that on 26.09.2021 an appeal
was preferred to the Secretary, Land Revenue and Disaster
Management Department in terms of the relevant clause of
Notification No.119/Home/2010 dated 26.10.2010 which
reads as under:-
The issuing authority is also authorized to
“
cancel the Certificate of Identification of a
person if it is reasonably established that the
Certificate has been obtained by him/her or on
his/her behalf by misrepresentation or
suppression of any material fact.
Any person aggrieved by the refusal to
grant or cancellation of his/her Certificate of
Identification by the Issuing Authority may
apply within one month of such refusal or
cancellation to the Secretary Land Revenue &
Disaster Management Department for redress.
”
8. The learned Appellate Authority was of the view
that the delay of 819 days could not have been condoned in
the facts of the case and rejected the appeal on that ground
alone without examining it on merits.
9. As seen above the cancellation of COI has
serious civil implications. In that view of the matter this
Court is of the view that the delay although substantial
should be condoned in the peculiar facts of the case to
enable the petitioners to ventilate their grievances before
the Appellate Authority on merits. More so when apparently
the petitioners seem to have been advised to file a civil suit
against the cancellation of their COI although an appeal
was provided for in Notification No.119/Home/2010 dated
7
W. P. (C) No. 55 of 2022
Netra Kumar Pradhan & Ors. vs. District Collector & Ors.
26.10.2010. The records reveal that the petitioners from at
least 18.02.2020 till 03.09.2021 were bonafide pursuing a
remedy before the Civil Court against the impugned Order
dated 01.07.2019. Considering the serious implications of
the cancellation of COI of the petitioners, this Court is of
the view that it would be unfair to non suit them in the
statutory appeal on the ground of delay in preferring the
appeal.
10. Accordingly, the impugned Order dated
05.04.2022 and note-sheet dated 19.09.2022 are set aside.
The Writ Petition is allowed. The matter is remitted to the
Secretary, Land Revenue and Disaster Management
Department for its re-examination on merits after granting
opportunity of hearing to the parties. The Appellate
Authority shall hear the matter afresh on merits and decide
the case.
( Bhaskar Raj Pradhan )
Judge
Approved for reporting : Yes
Internet : Yes
to/