2026:JHHC:27671 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 2492 of 2020 Chandwa Mukhya Bazar Bachao Samiti, represented through its President Santosh Prasad Sahu, son of late Ram Khelawan Saw, resident of village Chandwa, P.O and P.S. Chandwa, District- Latehar- 829 203..... Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Union of India, through Cabinet Secretary, at Cabinet Secretariat, Rashtrapati Bhawan, Central Delhi, P.O and P.S. Rashtrapati Bhawan, District Central Delhi, Delhi- 11004. 2. Ministry of Railway, through its Principal Secretary, at Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Limited 11th Floor Statesman House, Barakhamba Road, P.O and P.S. New Delhi, New Delhi-110001. 3. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway, Kasturba Nagar, Dhanbad. 4. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, through its Principal Secretary at Parivahan Bhavan, 1, Parliament Street, P.O and P.S. and District- New Delhi. 5. Director of National Highway Authority of India at Dwarka, New Delhi. 6. Chief Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, at Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 7. Ministry of Road and Construction Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, at Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 8. Deputy Commissioner, Latehar. 9. District Land Acquisition Officer, Latehar. 10. Executive Engineer, National Highway Division, Ranchi, at NHAI Regional Office, Ranchi, 129/C, Vidyalaya Marg, Ashok Kunj, Ashok Nagar, Argora, Ranchi. 11. Presiding Officer-cum-District Land Acquisition Officer, Latehar. 12. Junior Engineer, National Highway Division, Ranchi, at NHAI Regional Office, Ranchi, 129/C, Vidyalaya Marg, Ashok Kunj, Ashok Nagar, Argora, Ranchi. 13. The Executive Engineer, National Highways Division, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, at Booty Road, Near Ranchi University, Morabadi, Deen Dayal Nagar, Officers’ Colony, Bariyatu, Ranchi. … Respondent(s) With WP(C) No. 5008 of 2021 1. Dinesh Prasad, son of Raja Ram Sahu 2. Rajesh Kuamr Agarwal, son of Krishna Murari Agarwal. 3. Arjun Lal Agarwal, son of late Parmeshwar Prasad Agarwal 4. Ram Karan Sahu, son of late Lalchand Sahu 5. Rajendra Prasad Sahu, son of Murat Saw 6. Sitaram Agarwal, son of Mathura Saw 7. Suresh Prasad Gupta, son of Ramvrikh Sahu. All are residents of Main Road, Chandwa, P.O and P.S. Chandwa, District- Latehar. ..... Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Union of India, through Cabinet Secretary, at Cabinet Secretariat, Rashtrapati Bhawan, Central Delhi, P.O and P.S. Rashtrapati Bhawan, District Central Delhi, Delhi- 11004. 2. Secretary, Department of Road Transport and Highways, Govt. of India, at Parivahan Bhavan, 1, Parliament Street, P.O and P.S. New Delhi. 3. Director of National Highway Authority of India at Dwarka, New Delhi. 4. Chief Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, at Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi 5. Secretary, Road and Construction Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, at Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 6. Deputy Commissioner, Latehar. 7. District Land Acquisition Officer-Competent Authority, Latehar. 8. Executive Engineer, National Highway Division, Ranchi, at NHAI Regional Office, Ranchi, 129/C, Vidyalaya Marg, Ashok Kunj, Ashok Nagar, Argora, Ranchi. 9. Junior Engineer, National Highway Division, Ranchi, at NHAI Regional Office, Ranchi, 129/C, Vidyalaya Marg, Ashok Kunj, Ashok Nagar, Argora, Ranchi. … Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Vishnu Prabhakar Pathak, Advocate. For the State: Mr. Ashutosh Anand, AAG-III Ms. Rishi Bharati, AC to AAG-III For NHAI M/s Sweety Topno and Amrit Raj Kisku, Advocates. For UOI Mr. Prashant Pallav, ASGI Mr. Ayush, AC to ASGI ------ 33/14.09.2026 W.P.(C) No. 2492 of 2020 Merely the petitioner is an association of some persons, which is not even registered and is not even a juristic person, this writ petition is not maintainable at the instance of this type of association. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. However, it will be open to the individual land losers to approach this Court challenging the action of the respondents. Dismissal of the writ petition will not come in the way of any of the person, who is the title holder of the land in question, to challenge any action of the land acquisition, if the same is against the law. W.P.(C) No. 5008 of 2021 I have gone through the entire writ petition. In the entire pleadings, it does not even whisper that the petitioners are the owner of any land, which is sought to be acquired or in respect of which, the notices have been issued to them. The petitioners also cannot establish any nexus even remotely about the title of the land in question. Thus, I find no ground to interfere with this writ petition at the instance of these petitioners, who have failed to establish any relationship with the land in question. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. 14th September, 2026 (ANANDA SEN, J.) Anu/- Cp2. Uploaded on: 18.09.2026