Disposed

Roshan Jamil Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC18 May 2023WPC/1094/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand disposed of a writ petition seeking a direction to issue a rent receipt for Raiyati land. The Court did not adjudicate merits, granting liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation with the Circle Officer within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a fresh representation within four weeks; authority to decide within six weeks with a speaking order.

Roshan Jamil Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Writ and Judicial Review | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.1094 of 2023

¶3

-----

¶4

Roshan Jamil Ansari, aged about 33 years, s/o Late Salim Ansari, resident of Ukrid, P.O.-B.S.City, P.s.-Sector-12, District-Bokaro (Jharkhand). .… … Petitioner Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand.

¶6

Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration & Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand). 3. Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro, P.O. & P.S.-B.S.City, District-Bokaro (Jharkhand).

¶7

Circle Officer, Chas, P.O. & P.S.-Chas, District-Bokaro (Jharkhand). … … Respondents

¶8

¶9

CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

¶10

------For the Petitioner : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sharad Kaushal, A.C. to A.A.G.-III ------

¶11

Order No. 05 / Dated 18^th May, 2023

¶12

The writ petition although listed under the heading “Fresh Filing”, but with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties it is being disposed of by taking into consideration the prayer made in the writ petition.

¶13

2. The writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein a direction has been sought for upon the respondent, particularly Respondent No.4 to issue rent receipt after accepting rent in respect of the raiyati land measuring an area of 11 Acres 21 decimals in Plot Nos. 1290 to 1302, 1304, 1311 to 1328, 1336 to 1338, 1342, 1343, 1449 to 1453, 1455 to 1462 under MouzaBandhgora, Thana No.35, Thana-Chas, Khata No.10, Holding No.914, District – Bokaro.

¶14

¶15

3. Mr. Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, has submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned authority for redressal of his grievance.

¶16

4. Mr. Sharad Kaushal, learned A.C. to A.A.G.-III, appearing for the State respondent, has submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of by giving liberty to the writ petitioner to make fresh representation before the Respondent No.4, the Circle Officer, Chas and if such representation will be filed, the Circle Officer will pass appropriate order on the representation within the stipulated period.

¶17

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and without entering into the merit of the case, this writ petition is being disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the concerned respondent giving all the details along with relevant documents, within a period of four weeks’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶18

The concerned respondent will look into the matter and take decision in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of such representation after hearing the interested parties, if any.

¶19

If the decision is taken in favour of the writ petitioner or against the writ petitioner on whatsoever

¶20

¶21

ground, the same be communicated to him by passing speaking order.

¶22

6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶23

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶24

Birendra/

Roshan Jamil Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roshan Jamil Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sonu Kumar Manjhi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Brajesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

Kishan Kumar Jd Vs M/S Shri Ram Transport Finance Company Limited through Its Managing Director

Hari Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Babu Lal Ram Vs State of Jharkhand

Ajay Singh Raj Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary