IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No.657 of 2025 ----- Basant Kumar Mahalka, S/o Late Durga Prasad Mahalka, R/o Main Road, Latehar, P.O. & P.S.-Latehar, District- Latehar. .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand through Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration & Land Reforms, Ranchi. 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Latehar. 3. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Latehar. 4. The Circle Officer, Latehar. .......... Respondents. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishal Kumar Tiwary, Advocate Mr. Manjeet Kumar Chaudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ankit Kumar, A.C. to S.C.-I ----- Order No.03 Date: 27.03.2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner for utilizing his raiyati land measuring area of 20-30 decimals out of total area 2.70 acres, appertaining to Khata No.97, Plot No.3/1117, corresponding to new Khata No.160, new Plot Nos.3, 3/2043, 3/2044, Mouza-Mananchotag for construction of road over bridge (ROB) between Demu-Latehar Road, MDR No.249. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to lawfully acquire his aforesaid land, which is being used for construction of road over bridge (ROB), as the same had been settled in favour of his father way back in the year 1952. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the year 1952, the land measuring an area of 3.07 acres situated at Village-Mananchotag, District-Latehar was settled in favour of the petitioner’s father, the description of old khata number and old plot numbers of which is as under: Khata No. Plot No. Area (in acre) 97 3/1117 2.70 3/1118 0.37 Total 3.07 3. It is further submitted that after death of the petitioner’s father, the succession mutation was allowed in favour of the petitioner vide Mutation Case No.378/1977-78, whereby his name was mutated vide order dated 13th December, 1977 by the Circle Officer, Latehar. It is also submitted that during the recent survey, the aforesaid land was wrongly recorded as “Anabad Bihar Sarkar” and as such the petitioner filed a case under Section 87 of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908, which was registered as Case No.430/99 was allowed vide order dated 21st December, 2004 and his name was entered in the khatiyan after deleting the name of Jharkhand Government pertaining to new Khata No.160, new Plot Nos.3, 3/2043 & 3/2044, measuring area of 1.93 acres, 87 decimals & 10 decimals respectively. The petitioner was issued the rent receipts by the Government of Jharkhand -2- W.P. (C) No.657 of 2025 till the revenue year 2015-16. Despite the said fact, the aforesaid land of the petitioner was utilized by the respondents for construction of road over bridge (ROB) without lawfully acquiring the same and making payment of appropriate compensation to him. The petitioner represented the respondent no.3-District Land Acquisition Officer, Latehar in this regard, however the same was remained unresponded, which compelled him to prefer the present writ petition. 4. Mr. Ankit Kumar, learned A.C. to S.C.-I, appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the petitioner’s aforesaid claim is required to be factually examined by the respondent no.3-District Land Acquisition Officer, Latehar and hence, if he prefers a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no.3, an appropriate decision will be taken in accordance with law within a time frame. 5. 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 a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no.3-District Land Acquisition Officer, Latehar. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no.3, after verifying the relevant records and on providing opportunity -3- W.P. (C) No.657 of 2025 of hearing to the petitioner/his representative, shall take an appropriate informed decision within four weeks from the date of filing of the said representation. If the respondent no.3 finds that the petitioner has the ‘raiyati’ right over the land in question and the same is being utilized for construction of road over bridge (ROB) without lawfully acquiring it, an appropriate compensation shall be assessed in accordance with law and be paid to the petitioner within six weeks thereafter. 6. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Vikas/ -4- W.P. (C) No.657 of 2025