Jharkhand High Court
WPC/7592/2026 of KHANDU DEVI Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 28 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 7592 of 2026 1. Khandu Devi 2. Suren Mahato 3. Susen Mahato 4. Lal Mohan Mahato ….. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration & Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. The
2026:JHHC:29116
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 7592 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Khandu Devi
2. Suren Mahato
3. Susen Mahato
4. Lal Mohan Mahato
….. Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration & Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
3. The Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella-Kharsawan
4. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Seraikella-Kharsawan
5. The Cricle Officer, Gamharia, Seraikella-Kharsawan
6. The Additional Deputy Collector, Seraikella-Kharsawan ….. Respondents
-----
CORAM
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
----- For the Petitioners: Mr. Vijay Shankar Jha, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Amrit Raj Kisku, A.C to G.A-V
-----
04/28.09.2026 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent No.5 to fix and accept the rent from the petitioners for the land appertaining to Khata No. 156, Kheshra No. 499, measuring an area of 1.12 Decimals and Khata No. 155, Kheshra No. 500, measuring an area of 0.27 Decimal, Mouza-Chhota Gamharia, Thana No. 67, District-Seraikella-Kharsawan in favour of the petitioners.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in lawful possession of the land in question. The said fact would be evident from the order dated 18.01.2018 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella- Kharsawan in Cr. Rev. No. 93/1984 as the said criminal revision was filed against the order dated 30.04.1984 passed by the Executive Magistrate, Seraikella-kharsawan under Section 145 Cr.P.C.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners have already represented the respondent No.5 making request to fix and accept the rent as well as to issue the rent receipt with respect to the aforesaid lands, 2026:JHHC:29116
however, the same having remained unresponded, the petitioners have been compelled to prefer the present writ petition.
4. Mr. Amrit Raj Kisku, learned A.C to G.A-V appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that the aforesaid claim of the petitioners is required to be factually examined by the competent authority i.e. the respondent No.5. Hence, if the petitioners prefer a fresh representation along with the relevant documents before the respondent No.5 on the present issue, an appropriate decision will be taken in accordance law.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the prayer made in the present writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioners are given liberty to prefer a fresh representation along with the relevant documents on the present issue before the respondent No.5. On receipt of such representation, the respondent No.5, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as well as the other concerned persons and on making proper enquiry, shall take an appropriate informed decision in accordance with law within eight weeks from the date of filing of the said representation.
6. The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction.
Satish/-
(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)