Dismissed¶28

Bindu Barnabas Hansda v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC8 Dec 2025WPC/6971/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi; W.P. (C) No.6971 of 2025; Bindu Barnabas Hansda v. State of Jharkhand & others; single bench Rajesh Kumar, J.; decided 08 December 2025; writ petition rejected; mandamus sought for valuation of planted trees by District Forest Officer and compensation; Jamabandi nos. 06 & 27, Village Taljhari, Lalmatia, Godda; Eastern Coalfield Limited, Rajmahal Project; prayer for stay of coal mining at Taljhari Project; ground of rejection: no acquisition proceeding initiated; liberty reserved to approach afresh.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petition rejected, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the Court afresh if any cause of action arises further. ¶28

Bindu Barnabas Hansda Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2025:JHHC:36685

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

(Civil Writ Jurisdiction)

¶4

W.P. (C) No.6971 of 2025

¶5

¶6

Bindu Barnabas Hansda, aged about 46 years, son of Daniel Hansda, resident of village-Taljhari, P.O.+P.S.- Lalmatia, District – Godda (Jharkhand) …. …. Petitioner(s)

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. The State of Jharkhand

¶9

2. Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O.+P.S.Dhurwa, District – Ranchi.

¶10

3. Deputy Commissioner, Godda, P.O.+P.S.- Godda, District-Chatra.

¶11

4. Circle Officer, Boarijor, P.O.+P.S.- Boarijor, District-Godda.

¶12

5. Eastern Coalfield Limited through Chairman-Cum- Managing Director, P.O. and P.S.- Dishergarh, District-Paschim Bardhaman, State-West Bengal,

¶13

6. Area General Manager, Rajmahal Project, Eastern Coalfield Limited, Dhankunda, P.O. Br. Simra, P.S. Mahagama, District-Godda, State Jharkhand,

¶14

7. Head of Department (L&DA), Rajmahal Project, Eastern Coalfield Limited, Dhankunda, P.O.-Br. Simra, P.S.-Mahagama, District – Godda, State-Jharkhand.

¶15

8. District Forest Officer, Department Forest, Godda, P.O.+P.S.- Godda, District-Godda. …. …. Respondent(s)

¶16

¶17

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶18

¶19

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Avilash Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Krishna Kr. Bhatt, A.C. to S.C.-I Mr. Rajesh Lala, Adv.

¶20

¶21

02/Dated: 08^th December, 2025

¶22

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶23

2. The present writ petition has been filed for following reliefs:-

¶24

“(i) for issuance of a writ of or in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the Respondents specially Respondent Nos.6 & 7 to work in consonance with the respondent no. 8 for doing valuation as soon as possible of the trees planted by the petitioner over the land being Jamabandi no. 06 & 27 situated at Village Taljhari, P.O. & P.S. Lalmatia, District- Godda and thereafter making payment of compensation in accordance with the valuation of the trees provided by the respondent no. 8.

¶25

2025:JHHC:36685

¶26

(ii) Further the petitioner prays for stay on the entire operation of mining of coal in Taljhari Project as the same is being done in close proximity of the land where trees have been planted by the petitioner and if any mishappenning occurs entire investment of the petitioner will get destroyed as such the same is at stake at the hands of the respondents.”

¶27

3. It appears that the acquisition proceeding has not been initiated regarding the same land.

¶28

4. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to entertain the present writ petition, accordingly, the same is hereby rejected.

¶29

5. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court if any cause of action arises further.

¶30

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶31

Dated: 08^th December, 2025 Amar-Raja/Uploaded on 10.12.2025

¶32

Page | 2

¶33

W.P. (C) No.6971 of 2025

Bindu Barnabas Hansda v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bindu Barnabas Hansda 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

Uma Shankar Tiwari Vs State of Jharkhand, through Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms

M/S Prb Associates Represented through Its One of the Partner Namely Mahendra Mishra Vs the State of Jharkhand

All India Postal Employees Union Group C through Its Circle Secretary Puranjay Kumar Vs Union of India through the Ministry of Communications Deptt of Posts (Sr Section)

Janardan Ram Tiwary Vs the State of Jharkhand

Madan Kachhap Vs the State of Jharkhand

Uma Shankar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand