2025:JHHC:20893 1 W.P.(C) No.3206 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.3206 of 2025 ---- Manoj Kumar Bhagat, aged about 54 years, S/o Late Mahindra Prasad Bhagat, R/o Hartpara, Barharwa, Sahibganj, P.O & P.S. Barharwa, District-Sahibganj …. …. Petitioner -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj, having office at P.O & P.S. Sahibganj, District Sahibganj 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Rajmahal, having office at P.O. & P.S. Rajmahal, District Sahibganj 4. The Circle Officer, Barharwa Circle, P.O. & P.S. Barharwa, District Sahibganj 5. Rina Srivastava, Wife of Late Desh Dipak Srivastava 6. Nupur Singh, Wife of Surender Singh 7. Gunadhar Ramani, son of Chhedi Ramani 8. Bachu Pandey, son of Ram Kisun Pandey; 9. Usha Das, wife of Abhijeet Das; 10. Arvind Pal, son of Kanhu Pal Respondent Nos. 5 to 10 are the resident of Kaharpara Barharwa, P.O. & P.S. Barharwa, District Sahibganj …. …. Respondents ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Petitioners : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ashutosh Anand, AAG-III ---- 02/Dated: 29th July, 2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed for following reliefs:- “(i) For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) particularly in the nature of certiorari for quashing of dated 28.05.2025 (Annexure-9), passed in R.M.A. Case No. 3/2019-20 passed by Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Sahibganj whereby whereunder the order passed in R.E. Case No. 26/2017-18 vide order dated 31.12.2018 passed by Sub- Divisional Officer, Rajmahal is upheld and direction has been issued to the Circle Officer, Barharwa, Sahibganj to initiate encroachment case against the parties with regard to the disputed land situated at Mouza Barharwa, Jamabandi No.373/2017, Dag 2025:JHHC:20893 2 W.P.(C) No.3206 of 2025 No.733, Khata No.441 and Dag No.739 within two months and to remove the encroachment. (ii) For commanding upon the respondents not to execute and implement the order dated 28.05.2025 (Annexure-9) passed in R.M.A Case No.3/2019-20 during the pendency of the present writ application.” 2. It has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the State that the impugned order is revisable before the Divisional Commissioner. 3. In that view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition with a liberty to approach the revisional authority. 4. Accordingly, the present writ petition is hereby, disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Raja/- Uploaded