WPC/7588/2026 of MANPURAN MALLICK Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 28 September 2026

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. The Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad

3. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Dhanbad

4. The Circle Officer, Jharia Circle, Dhanbad

… … Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR -----

For the Petitioner

: Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate

For the Respondents

: Mr. Munna Lal Yadav, SC (L&C)-III ----- Order No. 02

Dated: 28.09.2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent no. 4 – the Circle Officer, Jharia Circle, Dhanbad to make necessary correction in the name of the petitioner’s grandfather which has wrongly been recorded as “Makul Mallick” instead of “Bhutu Mallick” in the online entry made in Register-II with respect to the land appertaining to Khata No. 73 (Old Khata Nos. 224 & 225), Plot Nos. 188, 189, 190 & 191 (Old Plot Nos. 65, 62 & 68) measuring an area of 01 acre 05 decimals of Mouza-Chasnala, Mouza No. 165, Circle-Jharia, District-Dhanbad.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner along with other co-sharers are the khatiyani raiyats of the land in question. In the revenue record, the name of “Bhutu Mallick”, the grandfather of the petitioner has been mentioned. However, in the online/web portal, the name of the recorded tenant for the said land, has wrongly been shown as “Makul Mallick”. The petitioner represented the respondent no. 4

2026:JHHC:29086

requesting to make suitable correction in the online portal, however, the same remained unresponded, which compelled him to prefer the present writ petition.

3. Mr. Munna Lal Yadav, learned SC (L&C)-III appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that the aforesaid claim of the petitioner is required to be factually examined by the competent authority i.e., the respondent no. 4. Hence, if the petitioner prefers a fresh representation in this regard before the respondent no. 4, an appropriate decision in accordance with law will be taken.

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

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

(Rajesh Shankar, J.) September 28, 2026 Manish

Uploaded on 28.09.2026