2025:JHHC:10294 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 7592 of 2023 --- 1. Chhatru Yadav, son of Late Tiko Gope, 2. Arjun Yadav, son of Late Ganesh Gope 3. Dwarika Yadav, son of Mangan Gope All are residents of village- Kanti, P.O.- Telaiya Dam, P.S.- Jainagar, District- Koderma … … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Koderma 3. The Circle Officer, Chandwara, District- Koderma …. … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioners : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Aman Shekhar, A.C. to G.A.-I Order No. 07 Dated: 03.04.2025 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent no. 3- the Circle Officer, Chandwara, to demarcate the petitioners’ land appertaining to plot no. 6075, Khata No. 71, Mouza- Kanti, Thana- Jainagar, Thana No. 27, District- Koderma measuring an area of 87 decimals, which, according to them, is their raiyati land but they are being disturbed by few co-villagers and have been restrained from constructing a boundary wall over the said land. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have the lawful right and title over the aforesaid land, however few co-villagers have been restraining them from constructing a boundary wall over the same. Under the said circumstance, the petitioners represented the respondent nos. 2 and 3 requesting inter alia to get the said land demarcated by deputing a government Amin, however the said representations remained unresponded, which has compelled them to prefer the present writ petition. 2025:JHHC:10294 2 3. Mr. Aman Shekhar, learned A.C. to G.A.-I appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that if the petitioners prefer a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no. 3, an appropriate step/decision will be taken by the said respondent. 4. It has repeatedly been held by this Court that the assistance of revenue authority in demarcation of the land is permissible only when there is certain confusion with respect to the boundary of the same. However, if there is a bonafide dispute at the instance of the other party with respect to the title and possession of the land and an application for demarcation is made by a person, the concerned revenue authority instead of taking step for getting the said land demarcated, should relegate the parties to seek remedy before the competent court of civil jurisdiction. 5. Since the petitioners’ representations have not yet been responded by the respondent nos. 2 and 3, the petitioners are given liberty to prefer a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no. 3. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no. 3, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and other concerned person(s), shall take an appropriate step/decision within six weeks from the date of filing of the said representation keeping in view the observation made herein above. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Ritesh/ (Rajesh Shankar, J.)