Sarju Dangi Vs the State of Jharkhand

¶1

2026:JHHC:18024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.C. No. 3323 of 2026

¶3

Sarju Dangi, aged about 58 years son of late Puran Dangi

¶4

Kedar Dangi@ Kedar Pd Dangi, aged about 52 years son of late Puran Dangi

¶5

Arjun Prasad Dangi@ Arjun Dangi, aged about 63 years son of late Puran Dangi, all are resident of village-Unta, P.O- Unta, P.S- Chatra. District: Chatra. ....Petitioner(s).

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand

¶8

The Deputy Commissioner, Chatra, P.O+P.S- Chatra, District Chatra.

¶9

Collector -cum- Divisional Forest Officer, South Forest Division, Chatra, P.O +P.S- Chatra, District - Chatra.

¶10

Forest Range Officer, South Division, Chatra, P.O+P.S-Chatra, District - Chatra.

¶11

Forest Conservator, Regional Circle, Chatra P. O+P.S- Chatra, District Chatra. …Respondent(s)

¶12

With

¶13

W.P.C. No. 2704 of 2026

¶14

Sarju Dangi, aged about 58 years son of late Puran Dangi

¶15

Kedar Dangi@ Kedar Prasad Dangi, aged about 52 years son of late Puran Dangi

¶16

Arjun Dangi @ Arjun Prasad Dangi, aged about 63 years son of late Puran Dangi, all are resident of village-Unta, P.O- Unta, P.S- Chatra. District:Chatra. ....Petitioner(s).

¶17

Versus

¶18

The State of Jharkhand

¶19

The Deputy Commissioner, Chatra, P.O+P.S- Chatra, District Chatra.

¶20

Collector -cum- Divisional Forest Officer, South Forest Division, Chatra, P.O +P.S- Chatra, District - Chatra.

¶21

Forest Range Officer, South Division, Chatra,. P.O+P.S-Chatra, District - Chatra

¶22

Forest Conservator, Regional Circle, Chatra P. O+P.S- Chatra, District- Chatra. …Respondent(s)

¶23

¶24

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶25

¶26

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sarvendra Kumar, Advocate

¶27

Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate

¶28

Ms. Rachna, Advocate For the Respondent (s) : Mr. Prashant Kumar Rai, Advocate -----

¶29

04/18.06.2026

¶30

1. Heard the learned counsels of the parties.

¶31

Page | 1

¶32

2026:JHHC:18024

¶33

2. The prayers made by the petitioners in both the writ petition are as follows: -

¶34

To quash/set aside the orders dated 29.07.2025 passed by learned Deputy Commissioner -cum- District Magistrate, Chatra in Encroachment (B.P.L.E) appeal Case no. 05/2018 (Annexure-4 in W.P.C. No.3323 of 2026) and Encroachment (B.P.L.E) appeal Case no. 4/2018 (Annexure-4 in W.P.C. No.2704 of 2026) whereby and whereunder the learned Deputy Commissioner, Chatra affirmed the orders dated 20.12.2017 and 11.11.2017 passed by learned Divisional Forest Officer, Chatra, South Forest Division, Chatra in B.P.L.E case no. 10/2009 and in B.P.L.E case no. 36/2009 respectively.

¶35

To quash/set aside the orders contained in letter no 4249 dated 21.12.2017 and letter no. 3872 Dated 13.11.2017 passed by the learned Collector- cum Divisional Forest Officer, South Forest Division, Chatra in B.P.L.E case no.10/2009 and B.P.L.E case no.36/2009 whereby and thereunder the said Authority without given proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioners adjudicate the cases in view of section 3 of Bihar Jharkhand Land Encroachment Act, to the petitioners to vacate the land pertaining to plot no. 3 area 3.00 acres and plot no.1 &3 area 4.80 acres.

¶36

Further, the petitioners prayed during pendency of the writ petition the impugned order dated 20.12.2017, 29.07.2025, 11.11.2017 and 13.11.2017 may kindly be stayed.”

¶37

3. The case of petitioners of W.P.C. No. 3323 and 2704 of 2026 is that land pertaining to Khata No.42, Plot no. 1 area 10.00 acres was settled in the name of Dahani Devi, mother of petitioners whose rent receipts were issued regularly by the Revenue Authority. There is a cow-shed and rest land is being used for cultivation. On the recommendation forwarded by the Forest Range Officer, Chatra, the Divisional Forest Officer, South Division, Chatra initiated proceeding under section 3 of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act against the petitioners being BPLE Case No.10/2009 B.O. Chatra and BPLE Case No.36/2009 B.O. Chatra on the ground that petitioners have encroached 3.00 acres of forest land inside the schedule forest area. The Collector- Cum -Divisional Forest Officer, Chatra South Forest Division without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and without

¶38

Page | 2

¶39

2026:JHHC:18024

¶40

supplying the map with respect to the alleged land encroachment under section 3 BPLE Act, passed the order dated 20.12.2017 in BPLE Case no.10/2009 and 11.11.2017 in BPLE Case no.36/2009 directed the petitioners to vacate the land in question. Being aggrieved, the petitioners filed appeal under Bihar Jharkhand Land Encroachment Act before Deputy Commissioner, Chatra being B.P.L.E. Appeal No.05/2018 and B.P.L.E. Appeal No.04/2018 but after hearing the parties, vide orders dated 29.07.2025, he affirmed the orders passed by the D.F.O., Chatra. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners that a complaint was also lodged previously by the Forest Department being Complaint Case No. 07/1981 under section 33 of the Indian Forest Act in which the petitioners have been already acquitted by Judicial Magistrate, Chatra. The Divisional Forest Officer, Chatra South Division, Chatra neither appointed Government Amin to measure land encroachment over forest/public land nor compared the same through map. He further submitted that the land in question of the petitioners is not a government land or forest land and they were not given adequate opportunity of hearing in this regard as respondents never supplied copies of the map and document to the petitioners. He further submitted that the Forest Range Officer has never done any survey on the land or measured the land and only on the basis of conjuncture and surmises proceeded against them.

¶41

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel on behalf of the respondents that the petitioners were issued notices under section 3 of the BPLE Act. He further submits that impugned orders have been passed after proper verification of records, conducting survey and following due principles of natural justice. He further submits that mother of the petitioners’ Dahani Devi had filed a

¶42

Page | 3

¶43

2026:JHHC:18024

¶44

title suit being Title Suit No.03 of 2005, which was decided against her. Thereafter, she filed Title Appeal No.23 of 2015 and the same was also dismissed. He further submitted that land falling under plot no.01 was notified as forest land in the year 1953. He further submits that the petitioners are claiming title over the land in question by virtue of hukumnama however, no such document has been brought on record. Thus, he prays that these writ petitions being devoid of merit are liable to be dismissed.

¶45

6. After hearing both the parties and upon perusal of the records, I find that there is dispute with regard to rights, title and interest over the land in question and whether the said land falls under forest land or not. Further, during the course of the argument, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that Title suit and Title Appeal were filed by the mother of these petitioners claiming title over the land, which were dismissed, for which they have filed a Second Appeal which is pending before the CoOrdinate bench of this Court.

¶46

7. Considering the fact that Title Suit and appeal being Title Appeal No.23 of 2015 was filed and the same was dismissed and thereafter, the Second Appeal was filed against it which is pending for adjudication before Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. I am not inclined to interfere with these impugned orders in these writ petitions by exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. Once the suit and appeal stand dismissed, the petitioners cannot get any relief.

¶47

8. Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed .

¶48

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶49

18th June, 2026 S.K.D./-CP-2

¶50

Uploaded on 23.06.2026

¶51

Page | 4

Sarju Dangi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarju Dangi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kailash Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mohamad Ahsan Faridi Vs the Union of India

The Branch Manager, Hdfc Bank Ltd., Golmuri Branch, Jamshedpur Vs the State of Jharkhand

Raj Kumar Kamal Vs Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director

Ms Project Equipment and Construction through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Vs Reserve Bank of India

Mangru Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand