Neutral Citation No.(2026:JHHC:21448-DB) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.5066 of 2026 With I.A. No.9982 of 2026 ----- 1. Binay Bihari Sharan, Son of Late Krishna Prasad Resident of Village Brinda, P.O. & P.S.-Tandwa, District-Chatra, Jharkhand. 2. Jitendra Singh, Son of Late Rameshwar Singh, Resident of Village-Brinda, P.O.-Khadhaiya, P.S.-Tandwa, District-Chatra, Jharkhand-825321. 3. Nago Ram, Son of Late Kubaliya Bhuiyan, Resident of Village- Brinda, P.O.-Khadhaiya, P.S. Tandwa, District-Chatra, Jharkhand-825321. 4. Kameshwar Ram, Son of Horil Ram, Resident of Village- Brinda, P.O.-Khadhaiya, P.S. Tandwa, District-Chatra, Jharkhand-825321. .......... Petitioners. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand represented through the Chief Secretary, having its office at Project Building, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, Ranchi. 2. The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Chatra. 4. The Additional Collector, Chatra. 5. The Land Acquisition Officer, Chatra. 6. Sub Divisional Officer, Simaria, Chatra. 7. The Circle Officer, Tandwa, Chatra. 8. District Forest Officer, South Division Chatra. 9. Range Officer, Forest, Tandwa, District Chatra. 10. National Thermal Power Corporation, through its Chairman- Cum-Managing Director, having its office at Plot No.77, Industrial Area, P.S. Lodhi Coloney. P.O. - Lodhi Road Head Post Office, New Delhi-110003. Neutral Citation No.(2026:JHHC:21448-DB) 11. Chief Executive Officer, National Thermal Power Corporation, having its office at Dhingnni Plaza Near Yogda Aashram, Chutia, P.O. & P.S.-Chutia, District - Ranchi, Jharkhand - 834001. 12. General Manager-Cum-Project Officer, National Thermal Power Corporation, having its office at Chatti Bariyatu, P.O. & P.S. Keredari, District - Hazaribag, Jharkhand. 13. Senior Manager, National Thermal Power Corporation, (N.T.P.C) having its Office at Sikri, P.O. & P.S. Barkagaon, District Hazaribag, Jharkhand. 14. Project Officer, N.T.P.C Pakri Barwadih Mines/Chatti Bariyatu, Hazaribag P.O. & P.S.-Keredari, District – Hazaribag. 15. Pollution Control Board through Chief Executive Officer, having its office at E-1, CTI Colony Sector-4, Birsa Nagar, Dhurwa, Р.О. & P.S. - Dhurwa, District - Ranchi, Jharkhand. 16. National Green Tribunal through its Registrar, having its office at Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg, P.O.- New Delhi G.P.O., P.S. Tilak Marg, District-New Delhi-110001. 17. Member Administrative/Technical SHAJ (State Highway Authority Jharkhand) office At Deen Dayal Nagar, Near NH Division, Booty Road, Morabadi Ranchi. 18. Jai Ambe Industries Private Limited, 37 Anupam Nagar Shankar Nagar, P.O. Shankarnagar P.S.Khambhardih, District-Raipur Chhatisgar- 492001. .......... Respondents. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Umesh Kr. Choubey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Aditya Raman, A.C. to G.A.-III For the Res. No.15 : Mrs. Richa Sanchita, Advocate Mr. Vidhan Kr. Singh, Advocate For the Res. No.18 : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Mr. Ankit Vishal, Advocate ----- Neutral Citation No.(2026:JHHC:21448-DB) Order No.02 Date: 21.07.2026 1. Heard Mr. Umesh Kumar Choubey for the petitioners, Mr. Aditya Raman A.C. to G.A-III for the respondent-State, Mrs. Richa Sanchita for the respondent no.15 and Mr. Indrajit Sinha for the respondent no.18. 2. The petitioners seek the following reliefs by instituting this petition: - “i) For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) or a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing of the tender of work order no.GEMC No.511687736702854 Dt. 28.08.2025 pursuant to Tender being GEM Bid No GEM/2025/B/5892212 dated 31-1- 2025 by which the respondent no.14 opened and allotted in favour of respondent no.18 partly to this extent the construction of road through village Brinda as it is not disclosed in tender and respondent no.18 is constructing illegally and in violation of all mandatory process for acquisition of land (Annexure- 5). ii) For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) or a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the state respondents to stay the work Order being GEM Contract No. GEMC No. 511687736702854 GEM Bid No. GEM/2025/B/5892212 dated 28.08.2025 awarded in favour of respondent no.18 (Annexure- 5) till the disposal of the present petition or to stay the operational proceeding of construction till proper acquisition process through state. iii) For Issuance of a direction upon the state respondents specially to respondent no.1 to call for report that how such an illegal construction of road has been started where mandatory provision of acquisition has not been followed. iv) For a direction upon the state respondent specially to respondent no.1 to take appropriate action against respondent no.18 a registered Private company who in violation of all legal course of acquisition has started such construction where no road map or any rout plan has either been identified or approved by administrative authority/state respondents or assessed properly with its DPR (Detailed Project Report) no NOC (No Objection Certificate Of Pollution Or Environmental Impact By Neutral Citation No.(2026:JHHC:21448-DB) State Pollution Control Board Or National Green Tribunal, Delhi and further to enquire about the matter that who are the erring officials or unrecognised interested persons/investors involved in such a illegal act directly/indirectly affecting the law of the land, procedure established under law as well as the concerned villagers.” 3. For the reasons discussed hereafter, we are satisfied that the very institution of this petition constitutes an abuse of the judicial process. 4. Firstly, the averments in the petition are entirely sketchy. The petitioners, apart from pleading that they are the residents of the village Brinda have not disclosed in what capacity they are instituting this petition for challenging the construction of a road and the work contract issued to the 18th respondent for such construction. 5. Secondly, from the reliefs claimed, it does appear that the petitioners’ star ground is that the land on which the road is being constructed has not been acquired under the new or old Land Acquisition Act. There are also vague statements about there being no administrative approvals, NOCs. etc. for the construction of this road. Incidentally, in this matter, the petitioners have gone to the extent of even impleading the National Green Tribunal as a respondent to the petition. 6. Thirdly, and what is most crucial to support our observation that this petition is an abuse of the judicial process, is that the first petitioner had in fact instituted W.P.(PIL) No.5022 of 2025 before this Court concerning the construction of the very same road which is the subject matter of this petition. Neutral Citation No.(2026:JHHC:21448-DB) 7. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court, by order dated 26th September, 2025 dismissed the W.P.(PIL) No.5022 of 2025 by granting liberty to the persons aggrieved to approach the Court, if so advised. 8. The co-ordinate Bench’s order dated 26th September, 2025 at Annexure-1 to the petition reads as follows: - “Clearly, this petition is misconceived as the person aggrieved has not approached this Court, rather the petitioner, who actually has no concern with the land in question, has filed the instant writ petition. 2. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed reserving liberty to the person aggrieved to approach this Court, if so advised”. 9. Undeterred, 2nd and 3rd petitioners in this petition filed yet another W.P.(PIL) No.2720 of 2026 again complaining about the construction of the very same road. This petition was, however, withdrawn on 21st April, 2026 with liberty to the aggrieved parties to challenge the acquisition in accordance with law, clarifying that nothing in the order will preclude the aggrieved parties from challenging the acquisition of their properties, in case they are aggrieved with such acquisition. 10. The order dated 21st April, 2026 disposing of W.P.(PIL) No.2720 of 2026 is transcribed below for the convenience of reference: - “1. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks leave to withdraw this petition but submits that liberty may be granted to the persons whose lands have been acquired to challenge such acquisition in accordance with law. 2. Leave is granted 3. The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. Neutral Citation No.(2026:JHHC:21448-DB) 4. Nothing in this order will preclude the aggrieved parties to challenge the acquisition of their properties, in case, they are aggrieved with such acquisition. 5. All contentions of all parties on merits of such a challenge are, however, left open.” 11. From the above two orders, it is very clear that the 1st, 2nd and the 3rd petitioners were denied locus standi to raise issues of acquisition or otherwise of the lands where the road is being constructed on the premise that they were not aggrieved parties or could they be said to have any legal concern with the road construction. This time, the petition includes the 4th and 5th petitioners, particulars of whom are nowhere disclosed in the petition. There is no averment about any interest or concern of these petitioners. By each time adding some petitioners or causing a petition to be filed through some other petitioners, the judicial process cannot be allowed to be abused. 12. Mr. Choubey, however, submitted that this time the petitioners have obtained additional information under the Right to Information Act. In support, he referred to the document at page no.29 of this petition, in which there is some reference to there being no notification about acquisition. However, on perusal of this document, we find that there are no particulars about the information sought for by the petitioners and there are equally no particulars in the information supplied to the petitioners. Based on some such information in any event, the petitioners cannot claim any right to maintain this petition, particularly given the two earlier attempts made by these very petitioners concerning the construction of this very road. Neutral Citation No.(2026:JHHC:21448-DB) 13. As noted earlier, the averments in this petition are extremely sketchy and bereft of any serious particulars. The substantial questions which the petitioners propose to raise are whether the acts of a private company constructing a transporting road “on government land as well as on villagers’ land” without any permission of the State respondents “is whimsical and completely against the law.” 14. This suggests that the petitioners are not claiming any right or interest in the land where the road is being constructed. The petitioners seem to concede that this is government land or that it is villagers’ land. Based on such averments, no petitions can be repeatedly filed or maintained. Such repeated filing of petitions based upon incomplete or contradictory particulars and without disclosing any serious interests, constitutes an abuse of the judicial process. 15. Mr Choubey referred to the communication dated 8th May, 2026 issued by the Circle Officer, Tandwa (Chatra) to the Officer-in- Charge of the local police station to get the construction work stopped. 16. We are quite surprised by this communication because we failed to understand how the Circle Officer can issue such directions to the Officer-in-Charge of the local police station. In any event, based upon such a communication, there is no question of the petitioners maintaining the writ petition in this Court after the previous two writ petitions were dismissed as misconceived or withdrawn. Neutral Citation No.(2026:JHHC:21448-DB) 17. We were inclined to award exemplary costs to these petitioners, given their conduct in repeatedly filing petitions on the same issue. Mr Choubey, however, pleaded that the petitioners are poor villagers engaged in agriculture and that, therefore, no costs should be imposed upon them. 18. While recording our disapproval of the repeated filing of such petitions and noting that the petitioners’ financial status did not prevent them from filing three writ petitions in this Court in quick succession, we impose a nominal cost of Rs.5,000/- on the petitioners. This cost must be paid to the Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority, Ranchi, within 15 days from today. 19. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with nominal cost. 20. I.A. No.9982 of 2026 for accepting Vakalatnama is allowed and remaining I.As., if any, are disposed of as they would not survive. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 21st July, 2026 Sanjay/Rohit Uploaded on 23.07.2026