2026:JHHC:19912 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(C) No.1596 of 2024 ----- Tej Prakash Oraon, aged about 60 years, son of Late Kartik Oraon, resident of Village-Morabadi, P.O.-Ranchi University, P.S.-Bariatu, District-Ranchi. … Petitioner(s). Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Commissioner, South Chota Nagpur Division, Ranchi, P.O.-G.P.Ο., P.S.-Kotwali, District-Ranchi. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, P.O.-G.P.O., P.S.- Kotwali, District-Ranchi. 4. The Additional Collector, Ranchi, P.Ο.-G.P.O., P.S.-Kotwali, District-Ranchi. 5. The Special Officer, Scheduled Area Regulation, Ranchi, P.O.-G.P.O., P.S.-Kotwali, District-Ranchi. 6. The Circle Officer, Bargain, P.O.+ P.S.-Bargain, District- Ranchi. 7. Tapeshwar Baraik, son of Late Jagarnnath Chik Baraik, resident of Village-Morhabadi, P.O.-Ranchi University, P.S.- Bariatu, District-Ranchi. … Respondent(s). CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Suraj Prakash, Advocate …...... 07 /07.07.2026: Heard the learned counsel representing the petitioner and the learned counsel representing the respondents. 2. The petitioner is challenging the notice contained in Memo No. 164 dated 22.02.2024 issued by the Circle Officer, Bargai, Ranchi which directed the petitioner to appear with all his documents and papers in relation to S.A.R. Appeal No. 19R15/2013-14 and S.A.R. Case No. 192 of 2008. 3. Since merely the notice has been challenged, a specific query was put to the parties as to whether the notice of proceeding is barred by any Act and whether the person who has issued the notice lacks jurisdiction, to this learned counsel for the State submits that neither the notice is barred by any Act nor it can be said that the Circle Officer, Bargai lacks jurisdiction. He also submits that the notice is also not vague. 2026:JHHC:19912 2 4. After going through the notice, I find that notice is neither vague nor it can be said that the Circle Officer, Bargai has got no jurisdiction to issue the said notice. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner was not a party to the SAR case and the appeal and had already appeared before the Circle Officer pursuant to the notice taking allthese grounds, this notice may be quashed. 6. Considering the groundswhich the petitioner is taking can be very well be raised before the Circle Officer, I am not inclined to quash the notice. 7. The petitioner should file his defence before the Circle Officer which will be considered as per the law and based on the documents and papers thereafter will pass an appropriate order. 8. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 07.07.2026 Tanuj/CP-2 Uploaded on 13.07.2026