2026:JHHC:12709 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.236 of 2021 ------ 1. Sanat Kisku, son of Ram Kisku, resident of Village Bagjori, Godda, P.O. Sarbhaga, P.S. Mahagama, District Godda. 2. Babu Lal Kisku, son of Jetha Kisku, resident of Village Basdiha, P.O. & P.S. Basdiha, District Godda. … … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Deputy Collector, Godda, having its office at Godda, P.O. & P.S. Godda, District Godda. 3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Mahagama, having its office at Mahagama, P.O. & P.S Mahagama, District Godda. 4. The Circle Officer, Boarijor, Godda, having its office at Boarijor, P.O. & P.S. Boarijor, District Godda. 5. General Manager, Rajmahal Group of Mines, Eastern Coalfields Ltd., Dhankunda, Lalmatia, P.O. Bara Simra, P.S. Lalmatia, District Godda. … … Respondents ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : None present. For the Respondent(s): Mr. Sushawan Bhawmik, AC to SC-V ------ 12/ 29.04.2026 No one appears on behalf of the petitioners. 2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:- “a. for the issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) for quashing of memo no.36 dated 14.10.2020 issued by respondent no.4 whereby and whereunder a new genealogical table has been prepared and name of the ancestor of the petitioner no.1 has been removed and further a direction was issued to fulfil the condition for filling up Indemnity bond for further process to release compensation. AND/OR b. For the issuance of an appropriate 2026:JHHC:12709 2 writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) in nature of mandamus to act according to memo no.35 dated 20.04.2019 with respect to genealogical table which was declared valid by respondent no. 3 vide memo no.1024 dated 07.09.2020. AND/OR c. During the pendency of the writ application memo no.36 dated 14.10.2020 may be kept at abeyance.” 3. Heard learned counsel representing the respondents. 4. From prayer and averments made in this writ petition, it is clear that the petitioners are challenging a genealogical table. A genealogical table, if it is challenged, the proper genealogy can only be proved by oral and documentary evidence. 5. This Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot enter into this realm of disputed question of fact, thus I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition. 6. However, the petitioners are at liberty to approach the appropriate Civil Court. 7. With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 29th April, 2026 Prashant. Cp-2 Uploaded on 12.05.2026