2026:JHHC:14348 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(C) No.3543 of 2026 ----- Subhash Bhandari, son of late Sadanand Bhandari, resident of village Dudhaipani, PO and PS Nituria, District Purulia, Manbhum … Petitioner(s). Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Revenue Department, Project Bhawan, PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi 2.The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi 3.The Land Reforms Deputy Commissioner, PO and PS Ranchi, District Ranchi 4.The Circle Officer, Namkum, PO and PS Namkum, District Ranchi … Respondent(s). CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Subodh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shaantanu Gupta, AC to AAG-III Mr. Sahbaj Aktar, AC to AAG-III …...... 02 /12.05.2026: In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “for issuance of the writ(s), order(s) and direction(s) commanding upon the respondent authority to issue the rent receipt as per the direction of Dy. Collector I/c L.R. under section 5, 6 and 7 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 (Case No. 2726R8 of 1955-56) in Khata No. 92, Thana No. 298, Mauza Hethu, Halka No. 3, total area 60.53 acres, District Ranchi And/or for issuance of the writ(s), order(s) and direction(s) commanding upon the respondent authority the petitioner filed the representation before the Circle Officer, Ranchi to issue the rent receipt of above said khata and plot number total area 60.53 acres of the land of the petitioner in pursuance of the order passed by the Dy. Collector I/c L.R. under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 inspite of the regular representation filed by the petitioner the Circle Officer, Namkum, has not issued the rent receipt to the petitioner which is violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India.” 2026:JHHC:14348 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that inspite of the order passed by the LRDC, Ranchi the respondents are neither accepting the rent of the land from the petitioner and nor issuing the rent receipts. The petitioner has approached the Circle Officer but the order has yet to be passed. 3. Learned counsel for the State submits that if the petitioner approaches the Circle Officer-respondent no. 4 by filing fresh representation, the same will be looked into by him considering the order passed by the appropriate authority which has attained finality and if there is no other legal impediment an appropriate order will be passed. 4. Considering the submission of the parties, I direct the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Circle Officer- respondent no. 4 who will consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate order. 5. The representation should be filed within four weeks and the decision should be taken within eight weeks thereafter. 6. If the claim of the petitioner is rejected for any reasons whatsoever the reasons should be communicated to the petitioner within a period of four weeks thereafter. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 12.05.2026 Tanuj/CP-2 Uploaded on 13.05.2026