RAGHO SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY AND ORS
WPC/1385/2014 · 2026-07-07
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Writ Petition (Civil)body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 19180 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 19180 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
( 2026:JHHC:19950 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 1385 of 2014
Ragho Singh, son of late Indrajit @ Guljar Singh, resident of village Kerki, P.O. Sakarpur, P.S. Gumla, District-Gumla ...... … Petitioner
Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, Dhuwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District- Ranchi 2.The Deputy Commissioner, Gumla, P.O., P.s. and District-Gumla
3. Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Gumla, P.O., P.s. and District-Gumla
4. The Circle Officer, Gumla, P.O, P.S. and District-Gumla
5. (a) Md. Samsuddin (b). Shamsu Jolha, both sons of Md.Yakub
6. Sri Kanchan Sahu, son of Sohra Sahu
7. Nilambar Sahu, son of Dhaneshwar Sahu
8. Tetki Devi, wife of Lagan Sahu
9. Satyanarayan Sahu, son of Parmeshwar Sahu
10. Urmila Devi, wife of Indradeo Singh
11. Anat Kumar Singh, son of Ram Sewak Singh
12. Vinay Kumar Kashyap, son of Shrawan Kashyap
13. (a). Suresh Thakur (b). Mithlesh Thakur (c) Ramesh Thakur (d) Mukesh Thakur All sons of Gilwari Thakur
14. Lalan Singh, son of late Ramlal Singh
15. (a) Gopal Nidhi (b) Raj Kumar Nidhi, both sons of Dinesh Nidhi 16(a) Chandrakant Nidhi (b) Ranbir Nidhi both sons of Dinesh Nidhi
17. Shampati Devi wife of Jagat Pal Sahu
18. Sraswati Devi wife of Krishna Sahu All residents of Gumla, P.O. and P.S. Gumla, District-Gumla .…. … Respondents
--------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner
:Mr. Rajarshi Sarkar, A.C. to Mr. Sunil Kumar For the State : S.C. (L&C)-1
19/ 07.07.2026: This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 27.01.2014 passed in Misc. Appeal Case No. 16/2012-13.
2. Mr. Rajarshi Sarkar, learned J.C. to Mr. Sunil Kumar, who is advocate on record submits that for the dispute one title suit has already been preferred and in view of that he has been instructed not to press this writ petition.
( 2026:JHHC:19950 )
3.
Learned counsel for the State has got no objection.
4.
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. Pending I.A, if any, stands disposed of.
Dt.07.07.2026
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-