Dharmendra Kumar Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

¶1

2026:JHHC:3633

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.842 of 2026

¶3

Dharmendra Kumar Ram, aged about 35 years.

¶4

Ratan Ram, aged about 40 years, Both Son of Late Darshan Ram, Resident of Village – Gumo, Jhumri Telaiya, Ward No.-20, P.O.-Gomu, P.S. - Telaiya, District - Koderma.

¶5

…… Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand

¶8

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

¶9

Circle Officer, Koderma Anchal, Koderma, P.O – Jhumri Telaiya, P.S. - Telaiya & District – Koderma. …... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶11

For the Petitioners : Mr. Ashok Kr. Sinha, Advocate Ms. Kumari Priyambda, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, SC (L&C)-I --------

¶12

02/Dated: 11th February, 2026

¶13

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs :-

¶15

“ (a) for issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s) and/ or direction(s), particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding upon the concerned respondent especially Respondent No. 3 i.e. Circle Officer to issue rent receipt of the lands pertaining to Khata No.-220/799 Plot No. 6211 Mouza-Gumo, Thana No.-12, Halka-2B measuring to an area of 2.10 Acres and pass appropriate Order upon the pending representation dated 20.08.2025 (Annexure -4) of the petitioners, taking into consideration the various Orders passed by this Court recent being order passed in W.P.(C) No.- 7259 of 2023 being Order dated 18/04/2024 as the Respondent authorities especially the Respondent No-2 & 3 are in Contempt of Court by violating the

¶16

- 1 - W.P.(C) No.842 of 2026

¶17

2026:JHHC:3633

¶18

various Orders passed by the Court by still not passing appropriate order upon the pending representation in view of the Order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Koderma pursuant to Order dated 29/09/2011 contained in Memo No. 2620 which has already been set aside by the Court on various occasions as apparent from the various orders passed by this Court as Annexed with.

¶19

(b) for issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s) and/ or direction(s), particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding upon the concerned respondents not to take any coercive step against the land of the petitioners that to without initiating any proceeding under law and without giving any opportunity of hearing.

¶20

(c) for issuance of a direction upon the respondents to pass appropriate Order upon the pending representation dated 20/08/2025 of the petitioners.”

¶21

3. The description of land of the petitioners is as follows :-

¶22

“Khata No.-220/ 799, Plot No.-6211, Mouza –

¶23

Gumo, Thana No.-12, Halka – 2B, total rakba 2.10 acres.”

¶24

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the order dated 01.09.2023, passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.4621 of 2021. Paragraph Nos.8 & 11 of the said order are relevant, which are quoted hereinbelow :-

¶25

“8. This Court is of the view that once a jamabandi has been opened by following a proper procedure and the party concerned is accepted as a tenant, the State authorities cannot refuse to accept rent. Registration of a sale deed can also not be denied unless the instrument of transfer of land is barred by any statute.

¶26

11. Restriction imposed on registration of sale deed and acceptance of rent from jamabandi raiyat by the State authorities by Memo No.2640 dated 30.09.2011 issued by Deputy Commissioner Koderma is not tenable.

¶27

Under the aforesaid facts an circumstances, the Circle Officer, Koderma (R-5) is directed to receive

¶28

- 2 - W.P.(C) No.842 of 2026

¶29

2026:JHHC:3633

¶30

the rent from the petitioners with respect to Jamabandi of land running in their name.

¶31

Further, Memo No.2640 dated 30.09.2011, issued by the Deputy Commissioner Koderma, shall not come in way to the registration of sale deeds and shall not be refused by referring to this memo if the other conditions are satisfied.

¶32

Writ Petition is accordingly allowed.”

¶33

5. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent State. Paragraph Nos.13, 18, 22 & 25 are relevant which are quoted herein-below :-

¶34

“13. That with regard to the statement made by the petitioners in paragraph-2, in the instant writ petition under reply, it is humbly stated and submitted that the same is totally false and not correct and as such hereby denied. The land in question is not Raiyati. The petitioners ought to have preferred instant writ after exhausting all the process of law. That the petitioner has not even waited the hearing or order of Circle Officer.

¶35

18. That it is humbly stated and submitted that according to the letter no.2074 dated 13.05.2016 issued by the Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reform, Jharkhand, the petitioners have not submitted the Form-K i.e. Zamindari Return, not submitted the Registered Hukumnama or Lease Deed moreover not submitted any order of competent authority for the issuance of Rent Receipt, hence the claim of the petitioners becomes suspicious.

¶36

22. That with regard to the statement made by the petitioners in paragraph-16 to 22, in the instant writ petition under reply, it is humbly stated and submitted that the same are totally false and not correct and such as hereby denied as the petitioners have filed representation but neither filed their documents nor put their argument before the Circle Officer not waited for the order after hearing.

¶37

25. That it is humbly stated and submitted that the land in question belongs to the State Government and on the basis of forged and fabricated document, instant writ has been preferred and only testing and wasting the precious time of Hon'ble High Court.”

¶38

6. The State has taken the plea that it is a suspicious Jamabandi and as such the title has been disputed. This is none of the business of the State to dispute the title of one and another person only on the basis of suspicion. The revenue authority is not supposed to decide the title suit so far as the mutation is concerned, if the name of the petitioners is in the Register-II then the revenue authority is bound to accept the rent and issue the rent receipt.

¶39

- 3 - W.P.(C) No.842 of 2026

¶40

2026:JHHC:3633

¶41

7. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands allowed and disposed of directing the respondents to accept the rent and issue the rent receipt

¶42

8. Pending interlocutory application, if any, stands disposed of.

¶43

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶44

11^th February, 2026 Ravi-Chandan/Uploaded on 12.02.2026