IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.511 of 2025 ----- Nepal Chandra Mahatha, aged about 79 years, s/o Late Sahadeo Mahatha, R/o Mohan Bazar, Patherdih, P.O. Patherdih, P.S. Jorapokhar, District-Dhanbad .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Rent Controller-cum-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Dhanbad. 3. Birendra Kumar Agarwalla s/o Late Gajanand Agarwalla, R/o Mohan Bazar, Patherdih, P.O. Patherdih, P.S. Jorapokhar, District-Dhanbad .......... Respondents. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate Mrs. Rashmi Lal, Advocate For the Res. Nos.1&2: Mrs. Surbhi, A.C. to A.A.G.-II ----- Order No.04 Date: 24.03.2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent no.2- Rent Controller-cum- Sub Divisional Magistrate, Dhanbad to expedite the hearing of Eviction Case No.56 of 2021 preferred by the petitioner invoking Sections 19 (c) (d) and 25 of the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 2011 (in short ‘Act, 2011’) as the same is pending since 2021. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a 79 years old man and is the landlord of the land and building known as ‘Mahatha Building’ situated at Mohan Bazar, Patherdih, Dhanbad. He has preferred Eviction Case No.56 of 2021 invoking Sections 19(c)(d) and 25 of the Act, 2011 against the respondent no.3 on 7th September, 2021. He has also filed an application under Section 27 of the Act, 2 W.P.(C) No.511 of 2025 2011 for directing the respondent no.3 to deposit the arrears of rent as well as current rent with respect to the building in question. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said eviction case has been kept pending by the respondent no.2 without taking any effective step in the same. The petitioner being an old man also invoked Section 25 of the Act, 2011 seeking immediate recovery of possession of the building in question from the respondent no.3. As such, the respondent no.2 was required to expeditiously dispose of the said eviction case preferred by the petitioner. Under the said compelling circumstance, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition. 3. Mrs. Surbhi, learned A.C. to A.A.G.-II appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.1 and 2 submits that if the petitioner has also invoked Section 25 of the Act, 2011, undoubtedly it is the duty of the respondent no.2 to dispose of the eviction case preferred by him expeditiously. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of the prayer made in the writ petition, the respondent no.2 is directed to expedite the hearing of Eviction Case No.56 of 2021 and to dispose it of in accordance with law after providing due opportunity of hearing to the parties as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 3 W.P.(C) No.511 of 2025 5. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with aforesaid direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Rohit/