IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 6513 of 2024 Md. Nejamudin @ Md. Nezam Kureshi ….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Latehar 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Latehar 5. The Crice Officer, Bariyatu, Latehar ….. Respondents ----- CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner: Mr. Aman Kumar For the Respondents: Ms. Rishi Bharti, A.C to A.A.G-III ----- 03/29.01.2025 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent No.5 to issue online rent receipt to the petitioner for the land appertaining to Khata No. 324, Plot Nos. 2349, 2345, 2630 & 1566, Village- Fullbasia @ Amarwadih, P.O+P.S-Balumath (presently Bariyatu), District- Latehar, measuring an area of 3.20 Acres, 2.95 Acres, 3.91 Acres & 4.30 Acres respectively, which has already been recorded in the Khatiyan in the name of the petitioner on 06.11.2017. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said land has been decreed in favour of the petitioner in Revenue Case No. 820/1990 under Section 87 of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 vide order dated 11.09.2013 passed by the Revenue Officer, Camp Court, Latehar. Thereafter, the Revenue Officer, Palamau recorded the same in the name of the petitioner in the Khatiyan vide order dated 06.11.2017. After having recorded the petitioner’s name in the Khatiyan, he filed an application before the respondent No.5 for issuing online rent receipt for the said land in his name. On receipt of the said application, the respondent No.5 forwarded the same to the office of the District Record Room Officer, Latehar to verify the amendment made in the Khatiyan in the name of the petitioner. The District Record Room Officer, Latehar sent his verification report to the respondent No.5 vide letter No. 53 dated 05.09.2024 stating that the amendment made in the name of the petitioner was true and valid. However, even after receipt of the said report, the respondent No.5 has not taken any step towards the said application, which has compelled the petitioner to prefer the present writ petition. 3. Ms. Rishi Bharti, learned A.C to A.A.G-III appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that if the petitioner prefers a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent No.5, an appropriate decision will be taken in accordance with law within a time frame. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the prayer made in the present writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent No.5. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent No.5, after verifying the relevant records and on providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, if so needed, shall take an appropriate informed decision in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of filing of the said representation. 5. The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction. Satish/- (RAJESH SHANKAR, J)