2025:JHHC:38730 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No.1224 of 2025 …. 1. Purnu Mahto, S/o Late Kanhai Mahto, aged about 84 years, R/o Village Tangartoli, P.O.&P.S.-Bundu, District-Ranchi, 2. Balgovind Mahto, S/o Late Digmbar Mahto @ Digam Koiri, aged about 73 years, R/o Village Tangartoli, P.O. & P.S.-Bundu, District-Ranchi, 3. Niranjan Koiri, S/o Late Digmbar Mahto @ Digam Koiri, aged about 64 years, R/o Village Bichkatoli, P.O. & P.S. Bundu, District- Ranchi, 4. Sainath Mahto, S/o Late Mahanand Mahto, aged about 39 years, R/o Village Tangartoli, P.O. & P.S.-Bundu, District- Ranchi, 5. Sanjay Kumar Matho, S/o Late Kunj Bihari Mahto, aged about 47 years, R/o Village Tangartoli, P.O. & P.S.-Bundu, District- Ranchi, 6. Bimal Kumar Mahto, S/o Late Kunj Bihari Mahto, aged about 33 years, R/o Village Tangartoli, P.O. & P.S. Bundu, District- Ranchi, 7. Ajay Kumar Mahto, S/o Late Kunj Bihari Mahto, aged about 38 years, R/o Village Tangartoli, P.O & P.S. Bundu, District-Ranchi ……Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand, 2. The Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, P.O. & P.S.-Ranchi, Ranchi 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S.-Ranchi District- Ranchi, 4. The Circle Officer, Bundu, P.O. & P.S. Bundu, District-Ranchi ……Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Sudarshan Srivastava, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwari, SC-I …… ORAL ORDER IN COURT Order No.06/6th November 2025 1. Pursuant to the order dated 18.09.2025 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar) of this Court and order dated 31.10.2025 passed by this Court, the Circle 2 Officer, Bundu is present before this Court. 2. The Respondent No.4 i.e. the Circle Officer, Bundu has filed Counter Affidavit in the light of order dated 18.09.2025 passed by this Co-ordinate Bench. 3. This Writ Petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioners by challenging the notice dated 13.12.2018 (Annexure-6) issued by the Respondent No.4 i.e. The Circle Officer, Bundu by which the petitioners have been directed to stop construction over the lands in Khata No.732, Plot No. 504, Thana No.28 area of eleven (11) acres, in which 0.64 acres land is earmarked for making Town Hall of Nagar Panchayat Bundu. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the notice dated 13.12.2018 (i.e. Annexure-6) is illegal and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that the petitioners are the lawful owners of the lands and the petitioners have been settled the land by their ex-landlords in the year 1938 Bundu Raj State. The petitioners are having in possession of 5.50 acres of land in Khata No.732, Plot No. 504, Thana No.28 and they had been issued land receipt by their ex-landlords and also by the State Government. It is submitted that the State has appeared and disputed the claim of the petitioners and as such the Respondents may be directed to demarcate the land of the petitioners and take proper step in accordance with law. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has submitted that land situated at Mouza-Bundu, pertaining to Khata No.732, Plot No.504, Thana No.28 admeasuring 22 acres stands recorded as ‘Gairmazurwa Khas’ land of the nature ‘Parti Kadim’ 3 which belongs to the State of Jharkhand. It has been submitted that the land in question was in the State of Bihar and the State has become the owner of the land free from all encumbrances under Section 4(a) of the said Act. It is submitted that the petitioner have encroached upon the parcel of land appertaining to Khata No.732, Plot No.504, and hence the notices were issued to the petitioners under Section 3 of Bihar (Jharkhand) Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956. It is further submitted that the land has been earmarked for the purpose of Town Hall. 7. Without going into the facts, this Court finds that the notices were issued in the year 2018 and the Writ Petition has been filed in the year 2025 i.e. the delay of more than 6 years. 8. Apart from this, the Court finds that mere notice has been issued against the petitioners. 9. Accordingly, this Writ Petition No.1224 of 2025 is hereby dismissed there is delay of more than six (06) years in filing this writ petition. 10. However, liberty is given to the petitioners to move before the Circle Officer in support of their grievances and place all the relevant documents and who shall pass necessary order in accordance with law. 11. The personal appearance of Circle Officer, Bundu is dispensed with. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Dated – 06.11.2025 Nishant/-