Jharkhand High Court Strikes Down Section 22-A on Public Policy-Based Registration Refusals

The news

The Jharkhand High Court has struck down Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, ruling that the state government cannot refuse land registration solely on the ground of public policy. A division bench of Chief Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Manoj Prasad delivered the judgment on a petition filed by Kaushalendra Kumar Singh, a resident of Hering village in Chatra district's Hunterganj area, on November 12, 2026.

Section 22-A was inserted through the Bihar Amendment Act, 1991, and empowered the state government to issue a gazette notification declaring any document or category of documents as contrary to public policy. Once notified, registration officers were required to refuse registration of such documents. The court found that the term 'public policy' lacked a clear and definite definition, and that giving the executive such broad discretion without specific legislative criteria was unconstitutional. Along with the provision, the bench quashed the state government's notification dated August 26, 2015, and all related orders, including the petitioner's registration refusal order of February 17, 2016.

The ruling does not remove all restrictions on land registration. Officials said other applicable land-transfer laws and statutory conditions remain in force. The court held that any legislative framework for restricting registration must specify its grounds and provide clear guidance for exercising authority, reducing the scope for arbitrary decisions while protecting legitimate regulatory objectives.

What is the Registration Act, 1908 and its Bihar amendment history?

The Registration Act, 1908 is a central legislation that consolidates the law relating to the registration of documents in India, providing for the establishment of registration offices and prescribing the documents that are compulsorily registrable. Section 22-A was not part of the original Act but was inserted by the Bihar Amendment Act, 1991, which applied to the undivided State of Bihar and continued to be in force in Jharkhand after its creation in 2000 under the Bihar Reorganisation Act. The provision was challenged for conferring unguided discretion on the executive to declare documents as contrary to public policy and refuse their registration. The Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. Basant Nahata (2005) had earlier struck down a similar provision in the Rajasthan amendment to the same Act, holding that the term 'public policy' was too vague to delegate such power to the executive without adequate legislative guidance.

What did Section 22-A allow the government to do?

Section 22-A was added to the Registration Act, 1908 through the Bihar Amendment Act, 1991. It authorised the state government to notify documents or categories of documents as contrary to public policy. Registration officers were then required to refuse registration of documents covered by the notification, leaving them no discretion to register such documents.

Why did the court find the provision unconstitutional?

The division bench held that public policy is an ambiguous concept with no fixed or clear definition. The provision gave the executive broad power to decide which documents to block without definite legislative criteria. The court ruled that such an arrangement allows arbitrary decision-making and does not meet constitutional standards, as any law delegating power to the executive must provide clear legislative guidelines for its exercise.

What restrictions on land registration remain after the judgment?

The court clarified that the ruling does not mean registration will happen without any checks or conditions. Other applicable land-transfer laws and statutory requirements remain in force. Registration authorities must continue to enforce those restrictions while applying the judgment. Any future legislative framework for restricting registration should specify its grounds and provide clear guidance for exercising authority.