6. Learned Counsel for the respondent-state submits that since the petitioner had obtained the order for removal of the details of the land in question from the prohibited list/Negative List of NDGRS by suppressing the fact regarding pendency of the proceeding under Section 4(h) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 being Sandigdh Jamabandi DCTR Case No.54 of 2021-22 ( State Vs Anurag Kumar ), Sandigdh Jamabandi DCTR Case No.132 of 2021-22 ( State Vs Anurag Kumar ) hence, the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi vide order dated 09.06.2023 after obtaining legal opinion upon the matter from the Government Pleader, Ranchi vide Letter No.82 dated 26.05.2023, recalled the previous order contained in Memo No.6702 dated 30.12.2022 and stayed the implementation of said order till the final disposal of proceeding under Section 4(h) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act initiated against the petitioner. He further submits that the land under Khata No.383, Plot No.411, area 5.36 Acres and Plot No.443 area 8.85 Acres of Village Pundag, Thana No.-228, District Ranchi stands recorded as Gairmajurwa Malik land under the landholder Baralal Kandrap Nath Shahdeo and the nature of the same as per the record of right is entered as parti Kadam . The Zamindari return submitted by the outgoing proprietor: Chintamani Trust with respect of land pertaining to Khata No.383 of Village Pundag, showing settlement of land in the names of Six Raiyats and it would apparent from aforementioned zamindari return that, the land in question, is not shown to have been settled with Sayyad Moinuddin Shah or Ganpat Mahto as contended by the petitioner. He relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Division Bench of this court in LPA No.318 of 2022 and analogous cases ( The State of Jharkhand & Ors. v. Md. Zulfan Ansari ) and submits that in the light of the aforesaid order, the instant writ application is not maintainable.
