Disposed¶22

Tulsi Yadav v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Feb 2026WPC/508/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tulsi Yadav v. State of Jharkhand and others (Deputy Commissioner, Additional Collector, Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Competent Authority cum Land Acquisition Officer, Circle Officer – Giridih); land acquisition compensation Rs.52,78,578.53/-; award dated 24.12.24 in Land Acquisition Case No.1/23-24; referral under Section 3H(4) of the National Highway Act, 1956; withdrawal with liberty to pursue remedy before referral court; writ petition disposed of; pending interlocutory applications disposed of; High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; Rajesh Kumar, J.; 03.02.2026; W.P.(C) No.508 of 2026; 2026:JHHC:2741.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to withdraw the writ petition and pursue the remedy before the referral court (matter already referred under Section 3H(4) of the National Highway Act, 1956); counsel for the State raised no objection.

Tulsi Yadav Vs State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether Respondent No.5 (Competent Authority cum Land Acquisition Officer, Giridih) should be directed by mandamus to extend the compensation amount of Rs.52,78,578.53/- pursuant to award dated 24.12.24 passed in Land Acquisition Case No.1/23-24 in favour of the petitioner and his brothers.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

Since the matter had been referred under Section 3H(4) of the National Highway Act, 1956 during pendency, the Court permitted learned counsel for the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to pursue his remedy before the referral court.

¶18

Key takeaways

With the aforesaid liberty, the present writ petition was disposed of.ratio¶22
Pending interlocutory application, if any, stood disposed of.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(C) No.508 of 2026 (neutral citation 2026:JHHC:2741), High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; decided 03.02.2026 by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar (sole Judge). Petitioner Tulsi Yadav sought a writ of mandamus commanding Respondent No.5, the Competent Authority cum Land Acquisition Officer, Giridih, to extend the compensation amount of Rs.52,78,578.53/- pursuant to award dated 24.12.24 passed in Land Acquisition Case No.1/23-24 in favour of the petitioner and his brothers. Learned counsel submitted that during the pendency of the writ petition the matter had been referred under Section 3H(4) of the National Highway Act, 1956 for adjudication, and accordingly sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to pursue the remedy before the referral court; counsel for the State raised no objection. The Court disposed of the writ petition with that liberty, and pending interlocutory applications, if any, stood disposed of. No substantive determination was made on the compensation claim, which passed to the referral forum.

¶1

2026:JHHC:2741

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.508 of 2026

¶3

Tulsi Yadav, aged about 44 years, S/o Late Lakshman Mahto, R/o Chotki Bergi, P.O & P.S. - Dumri, District – Giridih (Jharkhand). …… Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

¶6

State of Jharkhand.

¶7

Deputy Commissioner, Giridih, P.O., P.S & District – Giridih.

¶8

Additional Collector, Giridih, P.O., P.S & District – Giridih.

¶9

Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Giridih, P.O., P.S & District – Giridih.

¶10

Competent Authority cum Land Acquisition Officer, P.O., P.S & District – Giridih.

¶11

Circle Officer, Giridih, P.O., P.S & District – Giridih. …... Respondents

¶12

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶13

For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the Resp.-State : AC to AAG-III

¶14

03/Dated: 03rd February, 2026

¶15

1. The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief :-

¶16

“ (a) for issuance of appropriate writ/ writs in the form of mandamus commanding upon the Respondent No.5, directing him to extend the compensation amount of Rs.52,78,578.53/- pursuant to award dated 24.12.24 passed in Land Acquisition Case No.1/ 23-24 in favour of the petitioner and his brothers.”

¶17

2. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that during the pendency of the present writ petition, the matter has been referred under Section 3H(4) of the national Highway Act, 1956, for adjudication.

¶18

3. In that view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition with a liberty to pursue his remedy before the referral court.

¶19

- 1 - W.P.(C) No.508 of 2026

¶20

2026:JHHC:2741

¶21

4. Learned counsel for the State has raised no objection.

¶22

5. With the aforesaid liberty, the present writ petition is,

¶23