2026:JHHC:29779 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 7597 of 2026 Krishna Murari Choudhary ….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Limited, Ranchi 3. General Manager (Operation), Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Limited, Ranchi 4. Raju Kumar ….. Respondents ----- CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner: Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate For the JSBCL: Mr. Raunak Sahay, Advocate [through online mode] ----- 02/05.10.2026 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent-Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Limited (JSBCL), Ranchi to make payment of the arrear of lease rent along with statutory interest in terms with the lease agreement entered between the petitioner and the JSBCL on 25.02.2019. The petitioner also prays for issuance of direction upon the respondent-JSBCL to execute a fresh lease agreement with him for the property in question, which is still being used by the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 as a warehouse. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a lease agreement was entered between the petitioner and the respondent-JSBCL on 25.02.2019 for using the property situated at Mouza-Panduki, Khata No. 17, Plot No. 260, measuring an area of 27,503.60 sq. ft., P.S-Barwadda, District-Dhanbad as a warehouse. The said lease agreement was valid for the period from 25.02.2019 to 25.02.2022. Though the said lease was not formally renewed, however, since the property in question was being used by the respondent-JSBCL, the payment of lease rent was made to the petitioner till 15.04.2024 and no payment was made after the said date. 2026:JHHC:29779 2 3. It is further submitted that some dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondent No.4, who is the petitioner’s nephew relating to the ownership of the warehouse. However, the said dispute got finally resolved as the petitioner purchased the said property by way of two registered sale-deeds executed on 11.08.2024. After resolving the dispute, the petitioner intimated the competent authority of the respondent-JSBCL that the dispute with the respondent No.4 was resolved as he purchased the said property and as such the payment of lease rent should be continued in his favour. Despite the petitioner’s representation to that effect, the authorities of the JSBCL are not responding to the same, which has compelled the petitioner to prefer the present writ petition. 4. Mr. Raunak Sahay, learned counsel for the respondent-JSBCL, submits that the respondent No.2 is the competent authority and the aforesaid issue will be duly considered by the said respondent. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of the prayer made in the present wit petition, the respondent No.2 is directed to take up the matter and after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the respondent No.4, if so required, to take an appropriate decision in this regard within six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 6. The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction. Satish/- (RAJESH SHANKAR, J)