2025:JHHC:21183 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 3465 of 2025 Sukhdeo Tana Bhagat, S/o Baijnath Oraon, R/o Village-Sareya, PO- Bahera, PS-Piparwar, District-Chatra ... … Petitioner Versus 1. Central Coalfields Limited, through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Ranchi 2. The General Manager (Land & Revenue), Central Coalfields Limited, Ranchi 3. The General Manager, Piparwar Area (Land & Revenue), Central Coalfields Limited, Chatra 4. The General Manager, Piparwar Area, Central Coalfields Limited, Chatra 5. The Deputy Manager, (Land & Revenue), Piparwar Area, Central Coalfields Limited, Chatra … … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Om Prakash Prasad, Advocate For the Respondents : Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate ----- 02/31.07.2025 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner with respect to the land appertaining to Khata No. 11, Plot No. 194, Mouza-Chirlong, Thana No. 88 recorded in the record of rights as Gair Mazarua Khas, measuring an area of 17.50 acres out of total area of 46 acres which, according to the petitioner, was settled in favour of his ancestors by the ex-landlord and after vesting of zamindari, the State recognized his ancestors as raiyats and the rent receipts for the said land have also been issued since 1953-54. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid land was acquired by the Central Coalfields Limited for railway siding vide notification no. 1501 dated 26.05.1990. Subsequent to acquisition of the land, the Central Coalfields Limited sought information from the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chatra and the 2025:JHHC:21183 2 Circle Officer, Tandwa, Chatra with regard to status of the land and accordingly, the said officers submitted their report on 24.09.2009 certifying that out of 46 acres, an area of 17.50 acres was settled in favour of the petitioner’s ancestors by the ex-landlord vide Hukumnama in 1935 and since then the petitioner and his ancestors were in peaceful cultivating possession of the same for which rent receipts were also issued by the ex-landlord as well as the State. 3. It is further submitted that subsequent to notification dated 26.05.1990, though the petitioner’s land was acquired, no compensation has been paid to him. Aggrieved with the said situation, the petitioner represented various authorities in this regard, however, the same remained unresponded, which has compelled him to prefer the present writ petition. 4. Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that the petitioner’s aforesaid claim is required to be factually examined by the competent authority i.e., the respondent no. 2. Hence, if the petitioner prefers fresh representation along with the relevant documents in this regard before the respondent no. 2, an appropriate decision in accordance with law will be taken within a timeframe. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of prayer made in the writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no. 2 along with the relevant documents. On receipt of 2025:JHHC:21183 3 the said representation, the respondent no. 2, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner/his representative, shall take an appropriate informed decision in accordance with law within 12 weeks from the date of filing of the representation. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Manish