Krishna Kishore Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Dept. of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Krishna Kishore Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Dept. of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should be commanded by way of mandamus to immediately dispose of the petitioners' applications for demarcation of their land under Case Number 143/2025-26 and Case Number 144/2025-26. +1 more

Court's answer

Since the dispute is private, the petitioners may arrange for a private Amin who can demarcate the land of the petitioners; no mandamus directing State demarcation was issued.

Ratio / Principle

The dispute over the petitioners' land is absolutely private in nature; admittedly there is no dispute between the petitioners and the State which would call for a demarcation to be done by the State Authorities.

Key takeaways

If anyone disputes the possession of the petitioners, it will be open to the parties to approach the appropriate Forum.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(C) No.4695 of 2026, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (single judge: ANANDA SEN, J.; decided 06.07.2026) — Krishna Kishore Mahto & Leelawati Kumari v. State of Jharkhand (Deptt. of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms), Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad & Circle Officer, Gobindpur. Petitioners, claiming exclusive ownership and possession over land at Khata No.149, Khasra Nos.1691 (Area 7 decimil) and 1692 (Area 5 decimil), Village Kuruchi, Circle/P.S. Govindpur, Dhanbad, held after an oral partition of ancestral land, prayed for a mandamus directing immediate disposal of their pending demarcation applications (Case Nos.143/2025-26 and 144/2025-26), alleging threatened encroachment by neighbours. The Court held the dispute, if any, to be 'absolutely private in nature', with admittedly no dispute between the petitioners and the State calling for demarcation by State Authorities; it observed that the petitioners may arrange for a private Amin to demarcate the land, and that if anyone disputes their possession the parties may approach the appropriate Forum. Writ petition disposed of; no mandamus issued.

2026:JHHC:19856

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.4695 of 2026

------

Krishna Kishore Mahto, S/o Late Doman Chandra Mahto.

Leelawati Kumari, W/o Sri Krishna Kishore Mahto. Both R/o H. No.85, Khurchi, P.O., P.S. Gobindpur, District

Dhanbad.

… … Petitioners

Versus

The State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, P.O., P.S. & District Dhanbad.

Circle Officer, Gobindpur, P.O., P.S. Gobindpur, District Dhanbad.

… … Respondents

------

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioners : Ms. Rishi Bharati, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate ------

02/ 06.07.2026

By filing this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for

the following reliefs :-

“for a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to immediately and forthwith dispose of the applications of the petitioners for demarcation of their land under Case Number 143/2025-26 in relation to land situated at Khata No.149, Khasra No 1691, Area 7 decimil and Case Number 144/2025-26 in relation to the land situated at Khata No. 149, Khasra No. 1692, Area 5 decimil situated at Village Kuruchi, P.O. Gortopa, Circle and P.S. Govindpur, Halka – 08, Dist. Dhanbad.”

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

3. It is the case of the petitioners that the lands in question

1

2026:JHHC:19856

belong to the ancestors of the petitioners but later on it was orally partitioned and the petitioners and the other legal heirs are possessing the same as per the said partition. The petitioners claim that they are in exclusive ownership and possession over the aforementioned lands. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the neighbours and the others are trying to encroach the land of the petitioners, thus the State should demarcate the land.

4. The dispute, if any, is absolutely private in nature. Admittedly, there is no dispute between the petitioners and the State which would call for a demarcation to be done by the State Authorities. The petitioners may arrange for a private Amin , who can demarcate the land of the petitioners and if someone disputes the possession of the petitioners, it will be open to the parties to approach the appropriate Forum.

5. With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands

disposed of .

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

06^th July, 2026 Prashant. Cp-2

Uploaded on 10.07.2026

2