2026:JHHC:9970 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 2308 of 2026 ------- Tarcilla Minj @ Tarcilla Khalkho @ Tarcilla Khalkho Minj, aged about 89 years, Wife of Late Philip Minj, Resident of Ambua Toli, Mahuwadand, PO. & P.S.-Mahuawadand, District-Latehar, (Jharkhand). .... Petitioner(s). Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Department of Land & Revenue, Government of Jharkhand, having it office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S.-Doranda, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand). 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Latehar, having its office at Collectorate Building, Latehar, P.O. & P.S.-Latehar, District-Latehar, (Jharkhand). 4. The Superintendent of Police, Latehar, having its office at S.P. Office, Latehar, P.O. & P.S.-Latehar, District-Latehar, (Jharkhand). 5. The Deputy Commissioner for Land Reforms, Latehar, having its office at Collectorate Building, Latehar, P.O. & P.S.-Latehar, District-Latehar (Jharkhand). 6. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Mahuwadand, having its office at S.D.O. Office, Mahuwadand, P.O. & P.S.-Mahuwadand, District-Latehar (Jharkhand). 7. The Circle Officer, Mahuwadand, having its office at Cirle Office, Mahuwadand, P.O. & P.S.-Mahuwadand, District-Latehar, (Jharkhand). 8. Manina Kujur, Wife of Bematus Minj, Resident of Village-Sarnadih, P.O.- Aski, P.S.-Mahuwadand, District-Latehar (Jharkhand). … Respondents. ------- CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raj Nandan Chatterjee, Advocate Ms. Priya Saw, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate ------ 02/ 08.04.2026: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent No.8 has evicted the petitioner forcefully and has taken possession of the land in question pertaining to Plot No.745, Khata No.293, total area 32 decimals, situated in Mouza Ambuatoli, P.O. & P.S. Mahuwadand, District Latehar, which according to the petitioner belongs to the petitioner. The petitioner is claiming title by virtue of sale deed dated 16.05.2002 over the land in question and also admits that the petitioner has been dispossessed by the respondent No.8. 3. This type of private dispute cannot be decided in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner should approach the Civil Court for appropriate relief. 4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 8th April, 2026 Madhav/- Uploaded on: 10/04/2026 -2-