2025:JHHC:26120 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No. 397 of 2024 ----- Habibur Rahman, son of Md. Ishaque, R/o Konka Road, P.O.-GPO, Ranchi, P.S.-Lower Bazar, District- Ranchi .......... Petitioner -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Shri Suman Saurav, Circle Officer, Argora Circle, Ranchi .......... Opp. Parties ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the State : Mr. P.C. Sinha, A.C. to G.A.-III ----- Order No.07 Date: 29.08.2025 1. The present contempt case has been filed for initiating contempt proceeding against the opposite party no. 2 for his wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 11.10.2022 passed in W.P. (C) No. 3161 of 2022. 2. Mr. P.C. Sinha, learned A.C. to G.A.-III, refers to paragraph nos. 11 & 15 of the show cause affidavit dated 27.08.2025 filed on behalf of the opposite party no. 2, which read as under: “11. That vide the said order dated 15.02.2023, necessary corrections were directed and implemented in the Online Register-II with respect to the name of the petitioner's grandfather and father. The corrected entries are available and visible in the online record. 15. That it is further respectfully submitted that subsequent to the reasoned order dated 15.02.2023, the office of the Circle Officer, Argora has again examined the matter and passed a latest order dated 25.01.2025, reaffirming the corrections already carried out in the online Register-II and reiterating that with respect to the area of land, there exist conflicting entries in old records, which cannot be rectified at the administrative level. The said order 2025:JHHC:26120 2 again records that any modification in land area requires adjudication by a competent Civil Court before any further rectification is made in Register- II.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the opposite party no. 2 has not made the required corrections in the online Register-II with respect to the land in question keeping in view the entries made in the physical Register-II. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid show cause affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party no. 2, this Court is of the view that no case of contempt is made out against the opposite party no. 2. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite party no. 2 is hereby dropped. 5. The present contempt case stands disposed of. 6. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse as available under law for redressal of his subsisting grievance. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Vikas/