2026:JHHC:14430 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(C) No.3553 of 2026 ----- 1. Ankit Kachhap, aged about 24 years, Son of Mahadeo Kachhap, Resident of Beramad, P.O. & P.S.- Hatiya, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. Diwa Oraon, aged about- 37 years, Son of Late Somra Oraon, Resident of 39, Beramad, P.O. & P.S.-Hatia, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. Daliya Kachhap, aged about 61 years, Son of Sukram Kachhap, Resident of -114, Beramad, Tupudana, Hatia, P.O. & P.S.-Hatia, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. Balawati Oraon, aged about- 37 years, Wife of Mochan Oraon, Resident of Village Bermad, P.O. & P.S. Hatia, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 5. Piri Oraon, aged about 53 years, Wife of Khiru Oraon, Resident of Beramad, Tupudana, Hatia, P.O. & P.S.-Hatia, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. … Petitioner(s). Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand, 2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, At- Ranchi, P.O. & P.S.- Ranchi, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. The Additional Collector, Ranchi, At Ranchi, P.O. & P.S.- Ranchi, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 5. The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Ranchi, At- Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. Ranchi G.P.O, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 6. The Circle Officer, Namkum Anchal, Namkum, At- Namkum, P.O. & P.S.- Namkum, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 7. Raju Kachhap, Son of Dhuniya Kachhap, Resident of Tungari Toli Paika P.O. & P.S.-Angara, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 8. Nirmala Gadi, Pirua Kachhap, Resident of Tungri P.O. & P.S.-Hatia, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. … Respondent(s). CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shubham Mishra, Advocate Mr. Gyandev Raj, Advocate Mr. Kazi Asif Iqubal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shaantanu Gupta, AC to AAG-III Mr. Sahbaj Aktar, AC to AAG-III …...... 02 /12.05.2026: Heard the learned counsel representing the petitioners and the learned counsel representing the respondents. 2026:JHHC:14430 2 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that on the basis of an erroneously prepared genealogical table, respondent no. 7 is claiming share in the compensation amount in lieu of acquisition of land of the petitioners. He submits that the respondent no. 7 does not belong to the family of these petitioners and he has prepared a forged genealogical table in connivance with respondent no. 8 to get benefit, which according to the petitioners, the petitioners are solely entitled to. 3. The petitioners thus, has approached this Court for a direction upon the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi to enquire and give a finding on the genealogical table which has been prepared by the respondent no. 7 in connivance with the respondent no. 8. 4. The Deputy Commissioner has got no jurisdiction to give any finding on the genealogical table. If the petitioners feels that the Award has been prepared in the name of a wrong person or any person who is not entitled to and is not in the family of the petitioners, has been given benefit of the land acquisition/Award, it will be open to the petitioners to approach the appropriate Civil Court challenging the said action wherein the genealogical table can be verified and decided. 5. With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 12.05.2026 Tanuj/CP-2 Uploaded on 14.05.2026