WPC/7590/2026 of ANTONY TOPNO Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND, THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY on 28 September 2026

1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Chief Secretary, Ranchi

2. The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration & Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

3. The Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh

4. The Circle Officer, Katkamdag, Hazaribagh

5. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hazaribagh

6. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Hazaribagh

… … Respondents

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

For the Petitioner

: Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate

For the Respondents

: Mr. Tarun Kumar Mahato, AC to AG ----- Order No. 02

Dated: 28.09.2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents particularly the respondent no. 4 – the Circle Officer, Katkamdag, Hazaribagh to update the revenue record including the concerned website of the government with respect to the land appertaining to Khata No. 32, Plot No. 1/Hal Plot Nos. 1/849, 1/850 measuring an area of 4 acres 62 decimals, Plot No. 50, Hal Plot Nos. 50/851, 50/852, 50/859, 50/860 & 50/861 measuring an area of 13 acres 76 decimals and Plot No. 52, Hal Plot No. 52/862, measuring an area of 20 acres 14 decimals of Mouza-Adra, Katkamdag, Hazaribagh and to issue rent receipts of the said land in favour of the petitioner on payment of rent.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the demand of the said land was opened in the name of the petitioner’s father Late Arsen Topno @ Arsen Munda and the rent receipt for part of the land was also issued for certain

2026:JHHC:29069

period, however, the same is presently not being issued. Aggrieved with the said situation, the petitioner represented the different authorities including the respondent no. 4, however, the same remained unresponded, which compelled the petitioner to prefer the present writ petition.

3. Mr. Tarun Kumar Mahato, learned AC to AG appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that the aforesaid claim of the petitioner is required to be factually examined by the concerned 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, shall take an appropriate informed decision in accordance with law within eight 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