Narayan Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary the Land and Revenue Department — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Narayan Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary the Land and Revenue Department — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent no. 3 (Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sahibganj) to expedite the hearing of Mutation Appeal Case No. 02 of 2019-20 and dispose of it in accordance with law after providing due opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties, as expeditiously as possible preferably within six weeks from receipt/production of a copy of the order; the parties were left at liberty to put forth their respective contentions before respondent no. 3. No suspension of the appeal pending Title Suit No. 26 of 2012 was ordered.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent no. 3, the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sahibganj, should be directed not to proceed in Mutation Appeal Case No. 02 of 2019-20 till disposal of Title Suit No. 26 of 2012 pending in the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division)-I, Sahibganj. +1 more

Court's answer

This court directed respondent no. 3 (Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sahibganj) to expedite the hearing of Mutation Appeal Case No. 02 of 2019-20 and to dispose of it in accordance with law after providing due opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties.

Ratio / Principle

Disposal of the mutation appeal was to occur as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

Key takeaways

The petitioner's sought restraint (no proceedings in the mutation appeal till disposal of Title Suit No. 26 of 2012) was not granted; the writ petition was disposed of with the expedited-disposal direction instead.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi — W.P.(C) No. 35 of 2022, Order No. 05, dated 03.07.2024 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Shankar): Narayan Pandey v. State of Jharkhand (through Secretary, Deptt. of Revenue, Registration & Land Reforms) and 5 ors., incl. Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sahibganj and Renuka Kumar Pandey. Petitioner sought a direction to respondent no. 3 not to proceed in Mutation Appeal Case No. 02 of 2019-20 till disposal of Title Suit No. 26 of 2012 pending before Civil Judge (Sr. Division)-I, Sahibganj. Counsel confirmed the mutation appeal remained pending. Rather than restraining proceedings, the court disposed of the petition by directing respondent no. 3 to expedite the hearing and dispose of the appeal in accordance with law after giving the concerned parties due opportunity of hearing, as expeditiously as possible preferably within six weeks of receipt/production of a copy of the order, leaving the parties at liberty to advance their contentions.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P.(C) No. 35 of 2022

---

Narayan Pandey

… … Petitioner Versus

The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

The Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sahibganj

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sahibganj

The Circle Officer, Sahibganj

Renuka Kumar Pandey

…. … Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rama Kant Tiwari, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar, A.C. to A.A.G.-III

Order No. 05

Dated: 03.07.2024

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent no. 3- the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sahibganj not to proceed in Mutation Appeal Case No. 02 of 2019-20 till disposal of Title Suit No. 26 of 2012 pending in the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division)-I, Sahibganj.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction, submits that Mutation Appeal Case No. 02 of 2019-20 is still pending before the respondent no. 3.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the State respondents, the respondent no. 3 is directed to expedite the hearing of Mutation Appeal Case No. 02 of 2019-20 and to dispose of the same in accordance with law after providing due opportunity of hearing to the

concerned parties as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The parties are at liberty to put forth their respective contentions before the respondent no. 3.

4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid direction.

Ritesh/