WPC/7758/2026 of DASRATH LOHAR @ PANCHAM LOHAR Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THRO THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPT. OF REVENUE,REGISTRATION AND LAND REFORMS on 6 October 2026

1. The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration & Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

2. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi

3. The Additional Collector, Ranchi

4. The Circle Officer, Kanke Circle, Ranchi

…. … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

For the Petitioner : Mr. Vijayant Verma, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Shivam Kumar, A.C. to A.G.

Order No. 02

Dated: 06.10.2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the Circle Officer, Kanke Circle, Ranchi (the respondent no. 4) to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 13.11.2025 seeking correction in the name of the tenant as mentioned in the online Register-II with respect to the land appertaining to plot no. 622, Khata No. 199, Village- Nagri, P.O.- Burku, P.S.- Kanke, District- Ranchi measuring an area of 1.12 acres (hereinafter to be referred as “the said land”) and to enter the name of the petitioner in the same.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the name of the petitioner’s father- Genda Lohar with respect to the said land was being shown in the Register-II, however after demise of his father, due correction was made in revenue records and thereafter the rent receipts for the said land were being issued in the name of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the said submission, refers to copies of the rent receipts annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. He also produces a copy of rent receipt issued in the name of the petitioner in the year 1967. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the rent with respect to the said land was accepted from the petitioner till 2022, however thereafter, the same was not accepted. The online Register-II is also reflecting the name of the petitioner’s father- Genda Lohar who died decades ago. Under the said circumstance, the petitioner preferred a representation before the respondent no. 4 on 13.11.2025 seeking correction in the online Register-II and inserting his name as tenant of the said land in the same. However, the respondent no. 4 did not take any action on the same, which compelled the petitioner to prefer the present writ petition.

3. Mr. Shivam Kumar, learned A.C. to A.G. appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that the aforesaid claim of the petitioner is required to be factually examined by the respondent no. 4. Hence, if the petitioner prefers a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no. 4, an appropriate decision/step in accordance with law will be taken by the said respondent.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of prayer made in the present writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no. 4. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no. 4, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner/his representative and on examining the relevant records, shall take an appropriate informed decision/step in accordance with law within six weeks from the date of filing of the said representation.

5. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction.

(Rajesh Shankar, J.) October 06, 2026 Ritesh/ Uploaded on 06.10.2026