Disposed¶16

Anoop Orion Franclin Bakhla v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Apr 2025WPC/599/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mutation disposal writ, Jharkhand HC Ranchi, W.P.(C) 599/2025, Anoop Orion Franclin Bakhla v State of Jharkhand, Deputy Commissioner Khunti, Circle Officer Sadar Khunti, Mutation Case 79R27/2024-25/Khunti, R.S. Khata No. 42 Plot Nos. 2181 2182 2187 Mouza Jiyarapa, registered sale deed 17.08.2002, S.A.R. Case No. 18/04-05, Section 71-A Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act 1908, Kinu Munda, Aesa Khatun, eight-week disposal direction, Justice Rajesh Shankar, disposed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.3 (Circle Officer, Sadar, Khunti) to expedite the hearing of Mutation Case No. 79R27/2024-25/Khunti and dispose of it in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within eight weeks from receipt/production of a copy of the order. ¶16

Anoop Orion Franclin Bakhla Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2025:JHHC:10271

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(C) No. 599 of 2025

¶4

Anoop Orion Franclin Bakhla ….. Petitioner Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

The Deputy Commissioner, Khunti 3. The Circle Officer, Sadar, Khunti ….. Respondents ----- CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶7

¶8

For the Petitioner: Mr. A. K. Das For the Respondents: Mr. Faisal Allam, A.C to S.C (Mines)-III

¶9

¶10

07/03.04.2025 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to forthwith dispose of the application being Mutation Case No. 79R27/2024-25/Khunti filled by the petitioner for mutation of his land appertaining to R.S. Khata No. 42, Plot Nos. 2181, 2182 & 2187, MouzaJiyarapa, P.S-Khunti, Thana No. 227, District-Khunti, measuring an area of 1.16 Acres, which was purchased by him through registered sale deed dated 17.08.2002.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said land was originally owned by Md. Hanif, son of Late Mehar Ali Mian. Out of total area of 1.81 Acres, the petitioner purchased the land measuring an area of 1.41 Acres from the heirs of Md. Hanif through registered sale deed dated 17.08.2002. After purchase of the said land, a proceeding under Section 71-A of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 was initiated at the instance of one Kinu Munda against Aesa Khatun, one of the vendors/executors of the said sale deed, which was registered as S.A.R. Case No. 18/04-05. The said case was subsequently dismissed vide order dated 15.02.2007. Subsequently, the petitioner made an application seeking mutation of the said land before the respondent No.3, which was registered as Mutation Case No. 79R27/2024-25/Khunti. The petitioner thereafter received a notice signed on 09.07.2024 whereby he was directed to appear before the respondent No.3 on 13.07.2024. The petitioner accordingly

¶12

2025:JHHC:10271

¶13

appeared before the respondent No.3 along with the relevant documents relating to the land in question on 13.07.2024. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent No.3 has been keeping the said mutation case pending without taking any effective step in the same. Under the said compelling circumstance, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

¶14

Mr. Faisal Allam, learned A.C to S.C (Mines)-III appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that if the said mutation case is still pending before the respondent No.3, the same will be disposed of by the respondent No.3 in accordance with law expeditiously.

¶15

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid limited prayer of the petitioner, the respondent No.3 is directed to expedite the hearing of the said mutation case and dispose of the same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶16

The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid direction.

¶17

(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)

¶18

Satish/-

Anoop Orion Franclin Bakhla v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoop Orion Franclin Bakhla 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pramod Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand, through Secretary Department of Revenue and Land Reform, Ranchi

Indian Bank, Represented through Its Chief Manager, Mr. Suresh Chandra Chauhan Vs State of Jharkhand

Mahadeo Prasad Roy Vs the State of Jharkhand

Laxman Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

M/S Kohinoor Steel Private Limited Represented by Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Anutosh Majumdar Vs Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited through Its Chairman

Nitu Soni Vs the State of Jharkhand, through the Deputy Commissioner-Cum-District Magistrate, Ranchi