Ganesh Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI

W.P.(C) No. 1340 of 2024

----

Ganesh Mahato, aged about 62 years, son of late Kari Nath Mahato, resident of Village Beyang, PO Bariyak, PS Rajrappa, District Ramgarh

¶5

.... Petitioner

¶6

-- Versus -- 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.The Dy. Commissioner, Ramgarh 3.District Land Acquisition Officer, Ramgarh 4.Land Revenue Deputy Collector, Ramgarh 5.Chhedi Bhagat, son of late Nakhu Bhagat 6.Birendra Kumar Singh, son of Parasnath Singh 7.Umesh Kumar Gupta, son of Biga Bhagat 8.Pando Devi, wife of Khelaram Mahato All respondent nos.5 to 8 are residents of village Beyang, PO Bariyak, PS Rajrappa, District Ramgarh .... Respondents

¶7

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶9

--For the Petitioner :- Mr. Mohammad Asghar, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Mukul Kr. Singh, Advocate For Pvt. Resp.Nos.5 to 8 :- Mr. Arbind Kumar Sinha, Advocate

¶10

¶11

6 /07.08.2024 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the respondent State as well as the private respondent nos.5 to 8.

¶12

The prayer in this petition has been made for quashing of the order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the District Land Acquisition Officer, Ramgarh whereby he has directed to return back the compensation amount received by the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Asghar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the dispute is there between the petitioner and the private respondent nos.5 to 8 with regard to receiving of the amount and for that, the petitioner has raised the dispute before the concerned authority and thereafter the enquiry was made by the District Land Acquisition Officer, Ramgarh and in the enquiry it has come that both the claims are in dispute and in view of that the petitioner as well as the private respondent nos.5 to 8 were directed to refund the amount which they have received by way of compensation, however, the petitioner was

¶14

1 W.P.(C) No. 1340 of 2024

¶15

directed to refund Rs.31,35,758/- and the private respondent nos.5 to 8 were directed to refund Rs.5,22,436/-. He submits that now the request has been made by Project Director to Punjab and Sind Bank to withhold the amount of Rs.31,35,758/- in the savings account of the petitioner and pursuant to that, the said Bank has freezed the entire account and pursuant to that he has filed I.A. No.7447 of 2024 for amendment in the petition.

¶16

Learned counsel for the respondent State as well as the learned counsel for the private respondent nos.5 to 8 jointly submit that this dispute can be decided by the competent court and for that the petitioner is required to move before the competent court of civil jurisdiction. They further submit that so far as the amount is concerned, that is required to be maintained in light of the request made by the Project Director.

¶17

In view of above, so far as the main prayer is concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to move before the appropriate court.

¶18

The request was made by the Project Director only to withhold the amount of Rs.31,35,758/-, however, the Bank has freezed the entire account and in view of that, the petitioner is not able to operate the said account, and as such, this petition is being disposed of directing the petitioner to move before the Branch Manager, Punjab and Sind Bank by way of clarifying this aspect who will look into that and will modify the said order as the request has been made only to withhold the amount of Rs.31,35,758/-, however, instead the entire account has been freezed which was not the request of the said Project Director

¶19

With above observation and direction this petition stands disposed of.

¶20

Accordingly, the instant I.A stands disposed of.

¶21

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶22

SI/,

¶23

2 W.P.(C) No. 1340 of 2024

Ganesh Mahato v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesh Mahato v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jamuna Saha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pramod Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nirmal Masaat Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rajesh Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Naresh Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ganga Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand