Dismissed

Dhaneshwar Kahar v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Jharkhand HC23 Mar 2022WPC/3416/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that alternative legal remedies exist for declaring title and correcting revenue records. Consequently, writ jurisdiction was not maintained, but the petitioner was allowed to withdraw the petition with liberty to seek condonation of delay.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw writ petition with liberty to approach appropriate authority for condonation of delay under Section 14 of the Limitation Act.

Dhaneshwar Kahar Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors. — Landlord and Tenant | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Civil Writ Jurisdiction) W.P. (C) No. 3416 of 2010

¶2

….....

¶3

Dhaneshwar Kahar …. ..... Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand & Others …. ..... Respondents

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO (Through :- Video Conferencing)

¶7

…......... For the Petitioner : Mr. Bibhash Sinha, Advocate. For the Respondents/State : Mr. P.A.S. Pati, G.A.-II. For the Respondent Nos. 4 to 9 : Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate.

¶8

05/23.03.2022.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Bibhash Sinha has submitted that petitioner has preferred this writ petition for setting aside the order dated 30.03.2010, passed by the Additional Collector, Chatra, in Rent Assessment Appeal Case No. 27/2009, whereby the learned Additional Collector has reversed the order dated 17.06.2009, passed by the learned Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Chatra in Rent Assessment Case No. 31/2008-09 without properly appreciating the facts.

¶10

Learned counsel for the respondents / State, Mr. P.A.S. Pati. G.A.-II has submitted that legal remedy lies before the court of competent jurisdiction, where the petitioner can claim his right, title and interest on the basis of the Hukumnama granted in his favour with regard to declaration of title as well as confirmation of possession or recovery of possession or correction in the revenue records, as such, the writ petition may be disposed of.

¶11

Learned counsel, Mr. Atanu Banerjee appearing for the private respondent nos. 4 to 9 has also advanced the same view.

¶12

Considering the same, since legal remedy lies for declaration of title, recovery of possession or confirmation of possession or correction in the revenue records, this Court cannot grant relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in writ jurisdiction.

¶13

At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he may be permitted to withdraw this writ petition so as to avail legal remedy available under the law by giving aid of Section 14 of the Limitation Act.

¶14

-2-

¶15

Accordingly, this Court allowed the writ petitioner to withdraw this writ petition with a liberty to approach appropriate authority, who shall condone the delay in view of Section 14 of the Limitation Act.

¶16

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶17

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)

¶18

Sunil/-

Dhaneshwar Kahar v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhaneshwar Kahar 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

M/S.Sarveshwari Enterprises Vs Bihar State Financial Corporat

Jeetendra Kumar Pandey Vs Jharkhand Public Service Commi

Akhileshwar Prasad Srivastav Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Mani Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Harihar Prasad Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Dilip Kumar Sinha Vs Rosalin Dhodharai And Ors.