Mukesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department

2026:JHHC:16342

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.3906 of 2026

------

Mukesh Kumar, son of Late Rajdahm Sahu, resident of Argora, Kathal More Road, P.O. + P.S. Argora, District Ranchi. … … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Urban Development & Housing Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, at Project Bhawan, P.O. + P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶7

Municipal Commissioner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi, office at Kachhari Chowk, P.O., G.P.O., P.S. Sadar, District Ranchi.

¶8

Yashoda Garden, through its Developer, namely Rakesh Ranjan, son of Shyam Narayan Jha, R/o at Ward No.35, Argora Talab Road, P.O. + P.S. Argora, District Ranchi.

¶9

… … Respondents

¶10

------

¶11

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶12

------

¶13

For the Petitioner : Mr. Gopal K. Sinha, Advocate

¶14

For the Respondent : Mr. Kumar Pawan, Advocate Ms. Ranjana Mukherjee, Advocate

¶15

------

¶16

02/ 08.06.2026

¶17

By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for

¶18

the following reliefs:-

¶19

“i. For issuance of writ on the nature of mandamus directing respondent No.2 for initiating proceeding under Rule 17 of the Jharkhand Building Bye-Laws, 2016 read with Section 428 of the Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 upon the application of petitioner dt. 27.11.2025 regarding Yashoda Garden Apartment situated at Ward No.35, Argora Talab Road, Ranchi.

¶20

ii. For issuance of writ of the nature of mandamus commanding respondent No.2 for conducting enquiry in accordance with the provisions of Jharkhand Building Bye-Laws, 2016 & Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2016 with respect to Yashoda Garden Apartment situated at Ward No.35, Argora Talab Road, Ranchi and expeditiously deciding the dispute after giving ample

¶21

1

¶22

2026:JHHC:16342

¶23

opportunities to the parties.

¶24

iii. For issuance of writ of the nature of mandamus restraining the respondent No.3 from making any further construction during the pendency of instant writ petition.”

¶25

2. Heard learned counsel representing the petitioner and learned counsel representing the respondents.

¶26

3. Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the building plan of respondent No.3, which has been sanctioned, has taken into consideration the land which belongs to the petitioner also. It is his contention that the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the adjacent land of respondent No.3 should strictly be calculated on the basis of the land which respondent No.3 possesses. He submits that while sanctioning the FAR of respondent No.3, the land of the petitioner has been clubbed also, which is illegal.

¶27

4. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has already approached the Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi (RMC), but the RMC has not taken any step on the complaint of the petitioner.

¶28

5. Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that suffice it would be, if a direction is given to the Municipal Commissioner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi, or the appropriate Authority under the Ranchi Municipal Corporation, to consider the grievance of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order and take appropriate steps accordingly.

¶29

6. Considering the aforesaid submission, I direct the petitioner to file a fresh representation before respondent No.2 – Municipal Commissioner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi, who

¶30

2

¶31

2026:JHHC:16342

¶32

will consider the grievance of the petitioner and after going through the records and if necessary, on physical verification of the land, pass an appropriate order on the representation of the petitioner after hearing all the parties concerned.

¶33

7. It is expected that the entire process will be concluded within a period of sixteen weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order along with the representation.

¶34

8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of .

¶35

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶36

08^th June, 2026 Prashant. Cp-2

¶37

Uploaded on 10.06.2026

¶38

3

Mukesh Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department

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

Rajendra Mishra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ashok Uraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Surendra Kumar Dangi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jai Prakash Madhukar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kiran Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Tata Capital Housing Finance Limited Represented through Its Authorized Officer, Debasish Das Vs the State of Jharkhand Thr the Secretary, Dept. of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha.