2026:JHHC:11394 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 1817 of 2026 ------ Ratindra Nath Mahonty @ Rathindra Nath Mahonty aged about 73 years, S/o-Late Niranjan Mahonty, Director, Institute for Education, Village-Bijay, PO & PS-Seraikella, Dist-Seraikella- Kharswan, Jharkhand, Presently residing at Road No.4, Hariom Nagar, Adityapur, PO & PS-Adityapur, Dist-Seraikella-Kharsawan. … … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. State of Jharkhand. 2. Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella-Kharswan, PO, PS & Dist- Seraikella-Kharswan. 3. Circle Officer, Seraikella-Kharswan, PO, PS & Dist- Seraikella- Kharswan. … … Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, AC to Sr. SC-I ------ 04/ 20th April, 2026 1. Heard the parties. 2. Since this writ petition is filed for issuance of writ of certiorari, I am not inclined to direct the respondents to file a counter-affidavit. 3. The petitioner has prayed to quash the Appellate Order dated 11.03.2025 passed in BPLE Appeal No.14 of 2023-24 (Annexure-11), whereby the appeal of the petitioner is dismissed. 4. The petitioner has been declared as an encroacher and order has been passed by the Competent Authority against the petitioner to remove the encroachment in Mouza-Bijay, Thana- Seraikella, Khata No.269, Plot No.1759/A, Area, 2.5 decimal, Khata No.268, Plot No.1798/A, Area, 11 decimal, Khata No.268, Plot No.1799/A, Area 16 decimals, respectively, total 29.5 decimal. 5. Challenging the aforesaid order, the petitioner has filed an appeal under Section 11 of the Jharkhand Public Land Encroachment Act, 2000 before the Appellate Authority. The statue provides for filing this appeal. A right of appeal is not a matter of 2026:JHHC:11394 2 proceeding but it is a matter of substantive right of a party who is filing this appeal. 6. The Appellate Authority, thus, has to consider all the grounds taken by the appellant and re-assess the same and come to an independent finding based on the materials available on record. 7. While going through the appellate order, I find that the Appellate Authority has not independently decided the appeal of the petitioner. The Appellate Authority just relied upon the order passed by the Circle Officer and has held that since the Circle Officer has held that the petitioner has encroached the land, thus, the appeal is dismissed. 8. This is not a way how the appeal is to be decided. The Appellate Authority has to consider the defense of the petitioner and the grounds raised in the appeal which has not been done in the instant case. Thus, the appellate order is a cryptic order passed without application of the mind and without considering the grounds of appeal. Accordingly, the order dated 11.03.2025 passed in BPLE Appeal No.14 of 2023-24 is set-aside and the matter is remitted to the Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella- Kharswan to decide the appeal afresh within a period of 12 weeks, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 9. Accordingly, the BPLE Appeal No.14 of 2023-24 is restored to its original file. 10. The petitioner within three weeks will appear before the Appellate Authority with a copy of this order and the Appellate Authority will grant reasonable time to the petitioner to get prepared and argue his case on merits, thereafter, the Appellate Authority is expected to pass a reasoned order, considering the grounds of appeal. 11. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 20.04.2026 S.K.D/CP-2 Uploaded on 21.04.2026