The High Court disposed of the writ petition under Article 226 by directing the Circle Officer, Chainpur, to decide the pending encroachment case within three months, ensuring the petitioner is given an opportunity of hearing.
Direction to respondent no.3 to decide the encroachment case within three months and provide hearing to the petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 1190 of 2023
----------
Babu Lal Ram son of Late Ramprit Ram aged about 30 years, resident of Village + P.O. Narsinghpur, Pathra, P.S. Chainpur, District-Palamau (Jharkhand).
… … Petitioner
Versus
… … Respondents
------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD ------For the Petitioner : Mr. Vimlesh Kumar, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Tiwari, SC-I ----------------------------
ORAL ORDER
02/Dated: 18th May, 2023
Grievance of the petitioner is that the reply even though has been filed before the authority concerned but instead of deciding the same, notices are being send time and again, therefore, the instant writ petition.
2
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
Saurabh/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the direction to the concerned authority to decide the pending encroachment case within a period of three months should be issued.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Babu Lal Ram
State of Jharkhand
Deputy Commissioner, Palamau
Circle Officer, Chainpur
Sujit Narayan Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
