Disposed

Nirala Kumar Alias Nirala Kumar Saw v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC6 Mar 2025WPC/257/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner alleged encroachment on a government plot used as a public road blocking access to his house. The court held the Circle Officer, as Collector under the 1956 Public Land Encroachment Act, has jurisdiction and disposed of the petition with liberty to file an application there.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to apply under Section 3 of the Act before the Circle Officer; direction issued to take further steps as per the Act.

Nirala Kumar Alias Nirala Kumar Saw Vs the State of… — Land Acquisition | Jharkhand HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 257 of 2025

¶3

---

¶4

Nirala Kumar @ Nirala Kumar Saw son of Late Devlal Saw, resident of village- Dulhi, P.O.-Dulhi, P.S.- Pandwa, District- Palamau … … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

The Deputy Commissioner, Palamau at Daltonganj

¶8

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Palamau

¶9

The Block Development Officer, Pandwa, District- Palamau

¶10

The Circle Officer, Pandwa, District- Palamau

¶11

Kunal Paswan son of Suresh Paswan, resident of villageDulhi, P.O.-Dulhi, P.S.- Pandwa, District- Palamau

¶12

…. … Respondents

¶13

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner : Mr. Aman Kumar, Advocate For the Resp. Nos. 1 to 5 : Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, A.C. to A.G.

¶14

Order No. 06 Dated: 06.03.2025

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no. 6 has encroached the government land appertaining to plot no. 335, Village- Dulhi, Block- Pandwa, District- Palamau which is a public road as a result of which, the access to the petitioner’s house has been disrupted. The petitioner has represented the State authorities on several occasions agitating the said grievance, however no action has been taken on the same, which has compelled him to prefer the present writ petition.

¶16

2. Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, learned A.C. to A.G. appearing on behalf of the State respondents, submits that the petitioner may take recourse of Section 3 of the Bihar (now Jharkhand) Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 (in short, “the Act, 1956”) for redressal of his aforesaid grievance by filing an application before the Circle Officer, Pandwa (the respondent no. 5) who is the

¶17

1 W.P.(C) No. 257 of 2025

¶18

“Collector” under the said Act.

¶19

3. I find justification in the submission of learned counsel for the State respondents. Section 3 of the Act, 1956 confers the jurisdiction to the “Collector” under the said Act (the respondent no. 5 herein) to take steps in accordance with the procedure provided under the same on receipt of an application made by any person or upon information received from any source that any person has made or is responsible for the continuance of any encroachment upon the public land.

¶20

4. Under the said circumstance, the petitioner is given liberty to take recourse of Section 3 of the Act, 1956 by filing an application before the respondent no. 5. On receipt of the said application, the respondent no. 5 shall take further steps as per the provisions of the Act, 1956.

¶21

5. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction.

¶22

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶23

Ritesh/

¶24

2 W.P.(C) No. 257 of 2025

Nirala Kumar Alias Nirala Kumar Saw v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirala Kumar Alias Nirala Kumar Saw v. the State of Jharkhand

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

Dr. Kumar Alok Vs the State of Jharkhand

Meena Arya Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary

M/S Shampa Beverage Being Represented through Its Sole Proprietor Namely Mrs. Shampa Jash Vs Bank of India Being Represented through Its Chairman

Ram Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand through Deputy Commissioner, Gumla - Cum - Appellate Authority

Prabhat Kumar Modi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Malti Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand Thro Secretary Revenue Registration and Land Reform