IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 4225 of 2021 Alankar Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., through one of its directors – Binod Bihari Prasad Sinha, Rangatand, Dhanbad … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary, Ranchi 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad 3. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Dhanbad 4. The Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Road Division, Dhanbad 5. The Circle Officer, Dhanbad 6. The Mineral Area Development Authority, Dhanbad … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the Respondent Nos.1 to 5 : Mr. Sudhanshu Kr Singh, AC to SC-III For the Respondent No. 6 : Mr. Mahavir Pd. Sinha, Advocate Mr. Santosh Kumar Jha, Advocate ----- 04/13.01.2025 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner along with statutory interest within a specified period for use of its land without lawfully acquiring the same appertaining to Plot Nos. 3037 & 69, corresponding to Holding Nos. 60, 61, 52, 69, 70 & 73, measuring an area of 22.79 katthas in Ward No. 6, Mouza-Rangatand, District-Dhanbad. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had purchased the aforesaid land vide sale deed No. 3080 dated 03.03.2011. After the said purchase, the petitioner was in lawful possession of the same and had also constructed 12 shops on a portion of the said land. However, on 19.09.2013, the respondent no. 5 – the Circle Officer, Dhanbad started taking measurement of the land for the purpose of widening of the road beside the said land. Subsequently, part of the said land was also 2 W.P.(C). No. 4225 of 2021 utilized for widening of the road by demolishing 12 shops constructed over the same. The representative of the petitioner represented the respondent no. 2 – the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad on 19.09.2013 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition), raising objection with respect to the said measurement followed by reminders. The representative of the petitioner also represented the respondent no. 2 on 10.08.2021 claiming compensation for wrongful utilization of the said land, however, the same was not responded, which compelled the petitioner to prefer the present writ petition. 3. Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, AC to SC-III appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that the aforesaid claim of the petitioner is required to be factually examined by the competent authority i.e., the respondent no. 3 – the District Land Acquisition Officer, Dhanbad. Hence, if the petitioner prefers a fresh representation in this regard before the respondent no. 3 along with the relevant documents, an appropriate decision in accordance with law will be taken within a timeframe. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of prayer made by the petitioner in the present writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer fresh representation raising the aforesaid claim before the respondent no. 3. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no. 3, after verifying the relevant records and on making an enquiry (if so required) as well as on providing due opportunity of hearing to the representative of 3 W.P.(C). No. 4225 of 2021 the petitioner, shall take appropriate decision in accordance with law within two months from the date of filing of the representation. 5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Manish