2025:JHHC:10778 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No.719 of 2025 ----- Ram Singh, S/o Domna Singh, R/o House No.8, Mukhya Basti, Deoghar, P.O.-Bhitai Pahari, P.S.-M.G.M. Mango Town, District-Purbi Singhbhum. .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur. 3. The Additional Collector, Revenue, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur. 4. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum. 5. The Circle Officer, Mango Anchal, East Singhbhum. .......... Respondents. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumar Trivedi, Advocate Mr. Jeetendra Kr. Mishra, Advocate Ms. Deepa Kumari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suraj Prakash, AC to SC-VII ----- Order No.04 Date: 08.04.2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent no.5 to drop JPLE Case No.18 of 2024-25 initiated under the provisions of the Jharkhand Public Land Encroachment Act, 2000 against Shankar Tantubai and for quashing the notice dated 14th December, 2024 issued against him for removal of encroachment from the land appertaining to Khata No.202, Plot Nos.1119 & 1120, Mouza-Deoghar, Thana No.1147, P.S.-M.G.M., District-East Singhbhum, measuring an area of 0.49 acre as at present the said land/property is owned by the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has lawful right, title and possession over the 2025:JHHC:10778 2 land in question. Shankar Tantubai against whom JPLE Case No.18 of 2024-25 has been initiated is his tenant. Under the said circumstance, the petitioner should have been given opportunity to contest JPLE Case No.18 of 2024-25 which otherwise is unlawful as the land in question cannot be said to be a public land. 3. Mr. Suraj Prakash, learned A.C. to S.C.-VII, while referring to counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents submits that the final order in JPLE Case No.18 of 2024-25 has already been passed by the respondent no.5 on 14th December, 2024 against which there is a statutory remedy of preferring an appeal invoking Section 11 of the Bihar (now Jharkhand) Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956. Hence, the writ petition may not be entertained. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering that even prior to filing of the writ petition, the final order dated 14th December, 2024 was already passed by the respondent no.5 in JPLE Case No.18 of 2024-25 against which there is statutory remedy of preferring appeal under Section 11 of the Bihar (now Jharkhand) Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition at this stage. 5. Since the petitioner has claimed that he has the lawful right and title over the land in question and Shankar Tantubai is merely his tenant who is in possession of the said land, the petitioner as well as Shankar Tantubai are at 2025:JHHC:10778 3 liberty to prefer the appeal before the respondent no.2- Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur. If the said appeal is preferred within three weeks from the date of this order along with an application seeking condonation of delay in filing of the same, the respondent no.2 shall consider the said application leniently and shall proceed to hear the appeal on merit. 6. Till the said appeal is taken up by the respondent no.2 for consideration, the eviction process in the said land shall not be undertaken by the respondents. 7. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Vikas/