2025:JHHC:19849 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 69 of 2024 1. Manoj Khadiya, S/o Late Phagu Khadiya, R/o Kolebira, PO & PS- Kolebira, District-Simdega 2. Sudhir Kerketta, S/o Late Phagu Khadiya, R/o Kolebira, PO & PS- Kolebira, District-Simdega … … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Department of Registration and Land Reforms, Jharkhand 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Simdega 4. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Simdega 5. The Circle Officer, Kolebira, Simdega 6. Binod Tete, S/o Late Kandra Tete, PO & PS-Kolebira, District- Simdega … … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate Mr. Ajeet Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent Nos.1 to 5 : Mr. Faisal Allam, AC to SC (Mines)-III For the Respondent No. 6 : Mr. Neil Abhijit Toppo, Advocate Mr. Aviral Tanmoy Aind, Advocate ----- 06/21.07.2025 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 25.10.2023 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent no. 3 – the Deputy Commissioner, Simdega in S.A.R Appeal No. 02/2022-23, whereby the said respondent has erroneously dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioners without considering the fact that the lands purportedly sold appertaining to Khata No. 225, Plot No. 1378 measuring an area of 1.50 acres and Khata No. 226, Plot No. 1376 measuring an area of 0.33 acre (Total Area 1.83 acres), situated at Village- Kolebira, District-Simdega are their khatiyani lands which belong to “Bakast Bhuinhari” and the sale and purchase of the same would be in accordance with Section 48(3) of the C.N.T Act, 1908, however, in the instant case, there is violation of the said provisions and the purported sale of the aforesaid lands is void ab intitio. Further 2025:JHHC:19849 2 prayer has been made for issuance of appropriate direction upon the concerned respondents to ensure the possession of the petitioners over the land in question. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering that the petitioners have efficacious/statutory remedy of preferring revision against the impugned order before the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition at this stage. 3. The petitioners are, however, at liberty to take aforesaid recourse. 4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid liberty. 5. The interim order dated 03.12.2024 shall remain in force for one month from the date of this order. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Manish