Surajdeo Singh Alias Dhakkan Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Surajdeo Singh Alias Dhakkan Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; writ petition disposed of as premature, with liberty to the petitioner to prefer a fresh writ petition on the same issue depending upon the outcome of SLP(C) No.(s). 16642/2024 pending before the Supreme Court; I.A. No. 1213/2025 also disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the present writ petition seeking restraint on construction of road over the petitioner's land (Khata No. 383, Plot No. 496, Mouza-Pundag, P.S-Pundag, District-Ranchi) without due process of law is premature and entertainable at this stage, given that the petitioner's Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.(s). 16642/2024 challenging the Division Bench judgment dated 09.04.2024 in L.P.A. No. 231/2022 and other analogous cases is still pending before the Supreme Court.

Court's answer

Since the petitioner's Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.(s). 16642/2024 challenging the Division Bench judgment dated 09.04.2024 in L.P.A. No. 231/2022 and other analogous cases is still pending consideration before the Supreme Court, the present writ petition with the aforesaid prayer is premature; the Court is not inclined to entertain it at this stage and disposes of it accordingly.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is at liberty to prefer a fresh writ petition on the present issue depending upon the outcome of the SLP pending before the Supreme Court.

Key takeaways

As a consequence of disposal of the writ petition, I.A. No. 1213/2025 also stands disposed of.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (W.P.(C) No. 520 of 2025, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, Rajesh Shankar, J.) — Surajdeo Singh @ Dhakkan Singh sought directions restraining the respondents from constructing a road over his land (Khata No. 383, Plot No. 496, Mouza-Pundag, P.S-Pundag, District-Ranchi, measuring 7 acres) without following due process of law, and a show cause as to why the map plan for such road construction was sanctioned without due process and without considering his representation. The Court noted that the petitioner, aggrieved by the Division Bench judgment dated 09.04.2024 in L.P.A. No. 231/2022 and other analogous cases, had already preferred Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.(s). 16642/2024 before the Supreme Court, wherein notice was issued to the respondents including Chintamani Trust, Palkot, Gumla, and that the SLP was still pending. Held: since the Division Bench judgment remains in force and the SLP is pending, the writ petition is premature and is not entertained; it is disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition on the same issue depending upon the outcome of the SLP. I.A. No. 1213/2025 also stands disposed of.

2025:JHHC:10681

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P.(C) No. 520 of 2025

Surajdeo Singh @ Dhakkan Singh ….. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

The Secretary, Department of Road Construction, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

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

The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi

The Circle Officer, Nagri, Ranchi

The Director General of Police, Jharkhand, Ranchi

The Sr. Superintendent of Police, Ranchi

The Officer-in-Charge, Pundag Police Station, Ranchi ….. Respondents

CORAM

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

----For the Petitioner: Mr. Prabhat Singh For the Respondents: Mr. Mohan Kr. Dubey, A.C to A.G

05/07.04.2025 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents restraining them from constructing road over the petitioner’s land appertaining to Khata No. 383, Plot No. 496, Mouza-Pundag, P.S-Pundag, District-Ranchi, measuring an area of 7 Acres without following due process of law. Further prayer has been made for issuance of show cause to the concerned respondents as to under what circumstances they have sanctioned map plan for construction of road over the said land without following due process of law as well as considering the petitioner’s representation.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, in course of argument, submits that the petitioner aggrieved with the judgment dated 09.04.2024 passed by learned Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 231/2022 and other analogous cases, has preferred Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.(s). 16642/2024 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in which notice has been issued to the respondents including Chintamani Trust, Palkot, Gumla.

2025:JHHC:10681

Mr. Mohan Kr. Dubey, learned A.C to A.G appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that the petitioner without waiting for the outcome of the aforesaid S.L.P, pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, has preferred the present writ petition claiming that the land in question belongs to him. Since the judgement dated 09.04.2024 passed by learned Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 231/2022 and other analogous cases is still in force, the aforesaid claim of the petitioner is not worth consideration.

I find substance in the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the respondents as Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.(s). 16642/2024 filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 09.04.2024 passed by learned Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 231/2022 and other analogous cases is still pending consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Thus, the present writ petition with the aforesaid prayer is premature. Under the said circumstance, I am not inclined to entertain the present writ petition at this stage and the same is accordingly disposed of.

The petitioner is however at liberty to prefer a fresh writ petition on the present issue depending upon the outcome of the aforesaid S.L.P, pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Consequently, I.A. No. 1213/2025 also stands disposed of.

(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)

Satish/-