2025:JHHC:16629 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Civil Revision No. 10 of 2023 -------- Sukhdeo Baitha, S/o Late Matar Baitha, R/o Village-Bhawanipur, P.O. & P.S.-Chitra, District-Deoghar ... ... Petitioner Versus 1. Prabati Devi, W/o Sarbeshwar Rajak, D/o Rusan Baitha, R/o Village- Bhawanipur, P.O. & P.S.-Chitra, District-Deoghar at present residing at Makhni, P.O. Makhni, P.S.-Godda, District-Godda 2. Coal India Limited, represented through its Chairman, P.O. & P.S.- Asansol, District-Burdwan (West Bengal) 3. Eastern Coal Field Limited, a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd. represented through its Chief Managing Director at Sactoria, P.O. & P.S.-Disergarh, District-Burdwan (West Bengal) 4. General Manager, S.P. Mines, under Eastern Coal Field Ltd. at Chitra, P.O. & P.S.-Chitra, Sub-Division-Madhupur, District-Deoghar 5. Personnel Manager, S.P. Mines at Chitra, P.O. & P.S.-Chitra, Sub- Division-Madhupur, District-Deoghar 6. Mangli Baithain, W/o Late Mater Baitha, R/o Village-Bhawanipur, P.O. & P.S.-Chitra, District-Deoghar 7. Dulari Baithain, D/o Mater Baitha & W/o Ratan Rajak, R/o Village- Kalajharia, P.O.-Dalbari, P.S.-Jamtara, District-Dumka 8. Kunwa Debi, W/o Rattan Rajak, R/o Village-Kalajharia, P.O. Dalbari, P.S.-Jamtara, District-Dumka 9. Urmila Debi, D/o Mater Rajak & W/o Budhan Rajak, R/o Village- Mahjori, P.O. & P.S.-Margomunda, District-Deoghar 10. Bina Debi, W/o Makru Rajak, R/o Village-Kalajharia, P.O.-Dalbari, P.S.-Jamtara, District-Dumka 11. Tara Debi, W/o Kaila Rajak, R/o Village-Pindari Bankatti, P.O. & P.S.- Pindari Banketti, District-Deoghar 12. Lalita Debi, D/o Late Mater Baitha & W/o Cotam Rajak, R/o Village- Nagro, P.O. & P.S.-Bubhandihu, District-Deoghar … … Opp. Parties ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA -------- For the Petitioner : None For the Opp. Party Nos.2 to 5 : Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, Advocate : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate -------- Order No. 08/ Dated: 24th June, 2025 1. None appears on behalf of the petitioner. However, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos. 2 to 5 present. 2. As per office notes it appears that requisites etc. for notice upon opposite party Nos. 1 & 6 to 12 has not been filed and hence no notice has been issued in spite of direction of this Court in previous order. 3. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed for default. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Arpit