Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 21707 (JHR)

REESHI S. KAMALIA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER, SOUTH CHOTANAGPUR DIVISION, RANCHI,

WPC/6446/2025 · 2026-07-22

Sri Ananda Sen

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:21722 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C). No. 6446 of 2025 Reeshi S. Kamalia, aged about 35 years, son of Sanjay Chandulal Kamalia, resident of Sri Ram Garden, B- 2002, 10th Floor, Kanke Road, Opp. Reliance Mart, Misirgonda @ Pahargonda, PO & PS – Kanke, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi, having his office at PO & PS – Kutchery, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. The Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi, having his office at PO & PS – Kutchery, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, having his office at PO & PS – Kutchery, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-House Rent Controller, Ranchi, having his office at PO & PS – Kutchery, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand. 5. G.E.L. church in Chotanagpur and Assam, s society registered under Societies Registration Act having its office at G.E.L. Church Compound, Main Road, Ranchi, through its General Secreatary, Iswar Datt Kandulna, son of late Herman kandulna, resident of G.EL. Church Compound, Ranchi, PO – G.P.O. , PS – Lower Bazar, District – Ranchi. … … Respondents --- CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ayush Aditya, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Achyut Keshav, Sr. AAG --- 02/22nd July, 2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to prefer an appeal. 2. Considering the prayer of the petitioner, the petitioner is at liberty to prefer an appeal before an appropriate authority. ( 2026:JHHC:21722 ) 2 3. If an appeal is filed along with an application for condonation of delay, the application for condonation of delay will be considered sympathetically by the authority, keeping in view that this writ petition was pending before this Court. 4. It is expected that the authority will dispose of the appeal on merits after hearing the parties. 5. With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition is disposed of. 6. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Aditi Dated: 22.07.2026 Uploaded on 24.07.2026