Disposed¶24

Parwati Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 May 2026WPC/3123/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Parwati Devi v. State of Jharkhand & others, W.P.(C) No. 3123 of 2026, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, decided 04.05.2026 by Ananda Sen, J. Writ petition disposed of. Petitioner alleging forcible dispossession of land; Revenue Authorities' direction under Section 71 of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act to approach the Civil Court upheld; title, chain of ownership and recovery of possession to be established in an appropriate civil suit; no relief granted in writ jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted in the writ petition; petitioner directed to approach the Civil Court having competent jurisdiction for declaration of right, title and interest and recovery of possession. ¶24

Parwati Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted in the writ petition; petitioner directed to approach the Civil Court having competent jurisdiction for declaration of right, title and interest and recovery of possession.

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who alleges forcible dispossession by the respondents and claims ownership of the land, is entitled to recovery of possession in writ proceedings, or must establish right, title and interest and chain of title in an appropriate civil suit. +1 more

¶19

Court's answer

Where possession of the land is disputed, the petitioner must establish her right, title and interest and the chain of title/ownership over the land, which can only be done in an appropriate Civil Suit; the petitioner was directed to approach the Civil Court having competent jurisdiction claiming right, title and interest and recovery of possession.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

No illegality has been committed by the Revenue Authorities in directing the petitioner to approach the Civil Court.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Jharkhand High Court (Ananda Sen, J.) disposed of a writ petition filed by Parwati Devi, who alleged that the private respondents had forcibly dispossessed her of her land. The petitioner had earlier approached the Revenue Authorities with an application under Section 71 of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act; the Sub-Divisional Officer and the Deputy Commissioner held that a title dispute existed between the parties which could not be decided in a Section 71 proceeding and directed her to the Civil Court for declaration of right, title and interest and recovery of possession. Upholding that direction, the Court held that the petitioner must establish her right, title and interest and the chain of title/ownership over the land, which can only be done in an appropriate civil suit, and accordingly directed her to approach the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. The writ application was disposed of as no relief could be granted in writ jurisdiction.

¶1

2026:JHHC:13137

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 3123 of 2026

¶3

------

¶4

Parwati Devi, Wife of Ganesh Rana, Resident of Salway, PO + PSBalumath now Bariyatu, District-Latehar. … … Petitioner(s) Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand.

¶6

Deputy Commissioner-cum-District-Magistrate, Latehar, PO + PS & Dist-Latehar.

¶7

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Latehar, PO, PS & DistLatehar.

¶8

Bodhi Ganjhu, S/o Late Sadhar Ganjgu.

¶9

Mahendra Ganjhu, S/o Late Ogan Ganjhu.

¶10

Vijay Ganjhu, S/o Late Mahesh Ganjhu.

¶11

Bajrangi Ganjhu, S/o Late Mahesh Ganjhu.

¶12

Prameshwar Ganjhu Ganjhu, S/o Late Ramdhan Ganjhu. 9. Dharmendra Ganjhu, S/o Late Bodhi Ganjhu.

¶13

All are resident of Village-Salway, PO + PS-Balumath, (Now Bariyatu), Dist-Latehar. … … Respondent(s)

¶14

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶15

------

¶16

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nilendu Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Ashok Kr. Yadav, Sr. SC-I

¶17

02/ 04^th May, 2026

¶18

1. Heard the parties.

¶19

2. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of the land in question but the respondents have forcefully dispossessed the petitioner and have occupied the land.

¶20

3. The petitioner had approached the Revenue Authorities by filing an application under Section 71 of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act. Both the Sub-Divisional Officer and the Deputy Commissioner, after going through the records, have held that there is a title disputes amongst the parties, which cannot be decided in a proceeding under Section 71 of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, thus, they direct the petitioner to approach the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction for declaration of right, title and interest and for recovery of possession.

¶21

4. After going through the record, I find that no illegality has been committed by the Revenue Authorities, directing the petitioner to approach the Civil Court. The facts narrated in the petition, suggests that the respondents have taken possession of

¶22

¶23

2026:JHHC:13137 the land of the petitioner and the petitioner now is praying for recovery of possession. In this case, the petitioner has to establish the right, title and interest of the petitioner and the chain of title/ownership over the land in question of the petitioner which can only be done in an appropriate Civil Suit. Thus, I direct the petitioner to approach the Civil Court having competent jurisdiction, claiming right, title and interest and for a recovery of possession.

¶24

5. This writ application thus, disposed of , as no relief can be granted to the petitioner in this writ petition.

¶25

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶26

04.05.2026 S.K.D/CP-2 Uploaded on 08.05.2026

¶27

Parwati Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parwati Devi 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

Viriya Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner, Gumla

Chhotu Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sitakant Jha Vs State of Jharkhand

Bigu Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sunil Kumar Diwedi Vs the State of Jharkhand Ranchi.

Panwasiya Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand