The Jharkhand High Court has struck down Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, as introduced by the Bihar Amendment Act 6 of 1991 and adopted by the State of Jharkhand. This provision allowed the state government to declare certain document registrations invalid on the grounds of "public policy." The court held that such a provision violates constitutional principles and cannot be allowed to stand.
The matter was brought before a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Rajesh Shankar through a series of writ petitions, including one filed by the Chotanagpur Diocesan Trust Association (CNDTA), represented by Rt. Rev. B. B. Baskey and Rev. Arun Barwa. The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of the 1991 Bihar Amendment and the consequential notification issued by the Jharkhand government on August 26, 2015.
Read Also:- No Right to Challenge Policy Change Before Appointment: Jharkhand High Court
“Having regard to the said decision of the Supreme Court, which is binding on this Court… Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 as amended by the Bihar Amendment Act 6 of 1991 and adopted by the State of Jharkhand, as well as the consequential Notification issued… are struck down,” stated the High Court.
Section 22-A empowered the state government to prevent the registration of any document deemed to be against public policy, a concept criticized for its ambiguity and lack of definition. The court found this provision identical to one previously introduced by the State of Rajasthan, which had already been invalidated by the Supreme Court in the landmark case State of Rajasthan & Others v. Basant Nahata (2005).
In that case, the Supreme Court ruled that:
“The doctrine of public policy is vague and uncertain… and what is essentially within the exclusive domain of the judiciary cannot be delegated to the Executive unless the policy is clearly laid down.”
The top court also held that legislative policies must conform to constitutional mandates and are subject to judicial review. It emphasized that any interpretation of public policy falls solely within judicial jurisdiction and cannot be assigned to executive authorities.
Following the Supreme Court’s precedent, the Jharkhand High Court found that the power granted under Section 22-A violated Articles 14 and 246 of the Constitution. Article 14 guarantees equality before the law, while Article 246 lays down the distribution of legislative powers between the Centre and the States.
Read Also:- Jharkhand High Court Equips 496 Judicial Officers with Samsung Tablets to Enhance Digital Workflow
As a result, the High Court set aside all actions and orders issued by Sub-Registrars or officials of the Registration Department under the 2015 notification.
The court made it clear that:
“All orders passed by the Sub Registrars or officials pursuant to the notification dated 26.08.2015 shall stand set aside.”
The petitions were allowed to the extent of invalidating Section 22-A and the 2015 notification. However, the court left other issues raised in the petitions open for further consideration.
Case Title: Chotanagpur Diocesan Trust Association (CNDTA) and others v. State of Jharkhand and others
Case No: W.P.(C) No. 5088 of 2018 (with connected cases)
