Disposed¶14

Nandi Kumar Layak v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC15 Jul 2026WPC/4967/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand writ petition disposed; mutation of ancestral agricultural land; entry of legal heir's name in Register-II; Plot Nos. 441/2709 (2.13 acres) and 441/2710 (1.15 acres), Khata No.246, Mouza Amaghata, Dhanbad; direction to Circle Officer, Govindpur to consider and dispose of representation within eight weeks; time-bound disposal of mutation representation; Nandi Kumar Layak v. State of Jharkhand; Ananda Sen, J.; decided 15.07.2026.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.3 (Circle Officer, Govindpur, Dhanbad), upon the petitioner approaching him with a copy of the order, to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation for mutation within eight weeks of its receipt. ¶14

Nandi Kumar Layak Vs State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2026:JHHC:20911 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 4967 of 2026

¶2

Nandi Kumar Layak, aged about 47 years, S/o Late Krishna Kishore Layak, resident of Village & P.O. Nagarkiyari, P.S. Govindpur (Barwada), District Dhanbad

¶3

.... Petitioner(s).

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

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

¶7

Circle Officer, Govindpur, P.O. & P.S. Govindpur, District Dhanbad

¶8

… Respondents.

¶9

------CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Roy, AC to GA-III

¶10

------

¶11

02/ 15.07.2026 : Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the land measuring an area of 2.13 acres appertaining to Plot No.441/2709 and the land measuring an area of 1.15 acres appertaining to Plot No.441/2710 under Khata No.246, Mouza Amaghata (Mouza No.170) belongs to the grandfather of the petitioner. He submits that after the death of his grandfather and father, the lands need to be recorded in the name of the legal heir of the grandfather, who are alive. He further submits that the petitioner has applied for mutation but the respondents are sitting tight over the same. He further submits that suffice it would be if a direction is given to the respondent No.3 to dispose of the representation of the petitioner.

¶13

Considering the grievance of the petitioner, as he wants to get his name entered in Register-II, the petitioner should first approach the respondent No.3Circle Officer, Govindpur, Dhanbad along with a copy of this order, who will consider the representation of the petitioner and dispose of the representation within eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶15

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶16

15^th July, 2026 Madhav/Uploaded on:17/07/2026

Nandi Kumar Layak v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nandi Kumar Layak v. 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sweta Pareek Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Deptt of Health Medical Education and Family Welfare

Jharkhand State Rifle Association through Its General Secretary Sachin Kumar Singh Vs State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

M/S Baba Loknath Thermoforming, through Its Proprietor Amarjeet Singh Vs Authorized Officer, Canara Bank

Anju Pillay Vs the State of Jharkhand, through the Deputy Commissioner

Yashoda Hospital and Research Centre Ltd. through Its Authorised Signatory Rajesh Kumar Pandey Vs the Authorized Officer, Indian Bank(Allahabad)Sam Branch

Jharkhand Gramin Bank, Rep. through Its Authorised Signatory Being Mr. Ramcharan Prasad Rajak Vs State of Jharkhand, Thro the Secretary, Dept. of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa