Disposed

Biranchi Mahato v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Sept 2026Cont.(Cvl)/166/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand dropped contempt proceedings against the Deputy Commissioner, holding that the respondent had already issued an order rejecting the petitioner's land claim, rendering further proceedings unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings against opposite party no.2 dropped; petitioner at liberty to challenge the order of August 25, 2026.

Biranchi Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. (2026:JHHC:27391)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.166 of 2026

¶3

¶4

Biranchi Mahato, son of Late Ram Charan Mahato, resident of village & P.O. Nuagarh, P.S. Gamahari, District SeraikellaKharsawan.

¶5

.......... Petitioner. -VersusRavi Shannkar Shukla, Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella.......... Opp. Parties.

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

Ravi Shannkar Shukla, Deputy Commissioner, SeraikellaKharsawan.

¶8

¶9

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶10

----For the Petitioner : Mr. R.C.P. Sah, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar, AC to AAG-III ----- Order No.05 Date: 11.09.2026

¶11

The present contempt case has been filed for initiating contempt proceeding against the opposite party no.2 for his wilful and deliberate violation of the order dated 1^st October, 2024 passed in W.P.(C) No.3487 of 2023.

¶12

Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar, learned AC to AAG-III appearing on behalf of the opposite party no.2, while referring to the order dated 25^th August, 2026 (Annexure-B to the show cause affidavit dated 11^th September, 2026), submits that the said opposite party has passed a detailed order, rejecting the petitioner’s claim over the land in question.

¶13

As against this, Mr. R.C.P. Sah, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the opposite party no.2 has erroneously passed the order dated 25^th August, 2026, rejecting the petitioner’s claim over the land in question.

¶14

Be that as it may.

¶15

Page 1 of 2

¶16

Neutral Citation No. (2026:JHHC:27391)

¶17

Since the opposite party no.2 has already passed the aforesaid order, there is no need to further proceed in the matter. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite party no.2 is hereby dropped.

¶18

The present contempt case stands disposed of.

¶19

The petitioner is, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse against the order dated 25^th August, 2026 passed by the opposite party no.2 as permissible under law.

¶20

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶21

11^th September, 2026 Sanjay/ Uploaded on 11.09.2026

¶22

Page 2 of 2

Biranchi Mahato v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biranchi Mahato v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases