Disposed

Manki Braj Kishor Singh v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Jharkhand HC5 Nov 2019WPC/5365/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court declined to decide the writ petition regarding vesting of Khewats under Bihar Land Reforms Act. Liberty was granted to the petitioner to prefer an application/appeal before the respondent no. 4 for factual determination of grievances against the impugned letter.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to prefer application/appeal before respondent no. 4; writ petition disposed without deciding merits.

Manki Braj Kishor Singh Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors. — Landlord and Tenant | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 5365 of 2008

¶2

Manki Braj Kishor Singh

¶3

… … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Jharkhand

¶6

Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi

¶7

Circle Officer, Sonahatu

¶8

D.C.L.R., Ranchi … … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rohitashya Roy, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Suraj Prakash, AC to SC (Mines)-I -----

¶10

03/05.11.2019 The learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is allowed to implead the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Ranchi as respondent no. 4 in the present writ petition.

¶11

Let necessary insertion in the cause title of the writ petition be made in course of the day.

¶12

The present writ petition has been filed praying inter alia to call for the records of different khewats under Mouza-Salsud, P.S.Sonahatu and to quash letter no. 262 (II) dated 08.08.2008 issued by the respondent no. 3 informing the petitioner that the entire khewats under Mouza-Salsud and particularly Khewat No. 10 which is recorded as Mundari Khunt-Kattidar in the name of the petitioner’s father has vested in the State pursuant to promulgation of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to exempt the land recorded as Mundari Khunt-Kattidar under different khewats from the ambit of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950.

¶13

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the issue raised by the petitioner also requires factual determination, instead of entertaining the writ petition at this stage, it seems appropriate to give liberty to the petitioner to prefer an application/appeal before the respondent no. 4 agitating his grievance against letter no. 262 (II) dated 08.08.2008 issued by the respondent no. 3. If the petitioner prefers such application/appeal, the respondent no. 4 shall take up the same and after calling for the

¶14

relevant records and on providing due opportunity of hearing to the concerned persons, shall pass appropriate order in accordance with law without any unreasonable delay.

¶15

The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation.

¶16

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶17

Manish

Manki Braj Kishor Singh v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manki Braj Kishor Singh v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sita Ram Sah Vs State of Jharkhand Thr.Deputy

Sidho Kanhu Aadivasi Uchch Vidyalaya Lakhipur through Its Head Master Pranab Kumar Vs Human Resource Development

Deepak Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

M/S Nagarmal Modi Sewa Sadan Vs Employees Provident Fund Organ

Bhujender Rawani Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporatio

Bisho Sah And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.