Disposed¶21

Aditya Kumar Tiwary v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Jul 2026WPC/4831/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Jharkhand Public Land Encroachment Act; Section 3; Collector's statutory duty; encroachment complaint; non-initiation of proceeding; application by complainant; logical conclusion of proceeding; writ disposed; East Singhbhum; Circle Officer Mango; SDM Dhalbhum; Deputy Commissioner East Singhbhum; Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms; Ananda Sen, J.; 2026.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with the Court's observation that it is the Collector's statutory duty to initiate a proceeding on a Section 3 complaint and that the authority should proceed on the petitioner's complaint and take it to a logical conclusion in accordance with law. ¶21

Aditya Kumar Tiwary Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2026:JHHC:20254

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 4831 of 2026

¶3

Aditya Kumar Tiwary, S/o Ajay Kumar Tiwary, R/o Q. No.9/L4, Cross Road No.14, near Agrico Post Office, PO-Agrico, PS-Sidhgora, Jamshedpur.

¶4

… … Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand.

¶7

The Secretary / Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms, having office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, PO & PS-Dhurwa, Town and Dist-Ranchi.

¶8

The Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, having office at Deputy Commissioner Office, PO & PS-Sakchi, Jamshedpur, DistEast Singhbhum.

¶9

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate (S.D.M.), Dhalbhum Sub Division, East Singhbhum, having office at Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Old Civil Court Campus, PO & PS-Sakchi, Jamshedpur, Dist-East Singhbhum.

¶10

The Circle Officer, Mango, Jamshedpur, having office at Circle Office, Dimna, PO & PS- M.G.M., Jamshedpur, Dist-East Singhbhum, Jharkhand.

¶11

Sameer Sami Tigga, S/o Jai Masih Tigga, age not known to the petitioner, R/o Jawahar Nagar, Road No.6, Mango, PO-Mango, PSAzadnagar, Jamshedpur, Dist-East Singhbhum.

¶12

… … Respondent(s)

¶13

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶14

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Ranjan, Advocate Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Ms. Nirupama, AC to Sr. SC-I

¶15

------

¶16

02/ 09^th July, 2026

¶17

1. Heard the parties.

¶18

2. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the respondents are not initiating a proceeding under Section 3 of the Jharkhand Public Land Encroachment Act in spite of an application given by this petitioner.

¶19

3. It is the statutory duty of the Collector under the Act to initiate a proceeding when there is a complaint made by any party in terms of Section 3 of the aforesaid Act.

¶20

4. It is expected that the authority will proceed on the complaint and will ensure that the proceeding comes to a logical conclusion after following all the provisions laid down under the law.

¶21

5. With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition stands disposed of .

¶22

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶23

09^th July, 2026

¶24

S.K.D/CP-2

¶25

Uploaded on 10.07.2026

¶26

Page | 1

Aditya Kumar Tiwary v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aditya Kumar Tiwary 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

Narayan Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mrs. Jaya Sahu Vs Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited through Its Chairman-Cum-Managing Director

Anand Prabha Barat Vs State of Jharkhand, through Its Chief Secretary

Devendra Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shesh Mani Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand, Department of Home, Jail and Disaster Management

Santoshi Roy @ Santoshi Rai Vs the State of Jharkhand