2026:JHHC:10661 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.2498 of 2026 1. Balkesh Singh aged about 74 years son of Late Mukhdeo Singh, resident of Village Sarja, P.O. Polpol, P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau (Jharkhand) 2. Malti Devi aged about 70 wife of Balkesh Singh, resident of Village Sarja, P.O. Polpol, P.S. Daltonganj, District - Palamau (Jharkhand) …. Petitioner(s) Versus 1. State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District- Ranchi. 2. Deputy Commissioner, Palamau, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 3. Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Palamau, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 4. Circle Officer, Sadar Medininagar, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 5. Pramila Devi wife of Sri Dhaneshwar Singh, resident of Village Sarja, P.O. Polpol, P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. … Respondent(s) -------- CORAM: SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Verma, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate ------ 2/15.04.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner prays for quashing the order dated 02.07.2024 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau dismissing the Mutation Revision No. XV/57/20-21 filed by petitioner No.1 as contained in Annexure-4 of the petition affirming the order dated 05.10.2017 passed by the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Palamau which dismissed the Mutation Appeal No. XV/12/2016-17 filed against the order dated 25.05.2016 passed by the Circle Officer, Sadar, Medninagar in Mutation Case No.01 of 2015-16 whereby the Mutation Case filed by the Respondent No.5 for mutation of her name with respect to the lands measuring 0.64 Acres of Plot Nos.586, 588 under Khata No.09, Plot No.593 under Khata No. 42, Plot Nos.589 and 2026:JHHC:10661 2 590 under Khata No.12 situated at Village Sarja, P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau has been allowed by the Circle Officer, Sadar Medininagar. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the mutation application was allowed in favour of respondent No.5 and the petitioner has challenged the same before the three authorities and all the three authorities have upheld and allowed the mutation in favor of the respondent No.5. 4. The petitioner claims Right, Title and Interest over the property in question and admittedly the writ petitioners and respondent No.5 are co-sharers. 5. Considering the fact that three authorities have allowed the mutation in favor of respondent No.5 and the petitioner has challenged the same claiming right, title and interest over the land in question, which involves complicated questions of facts and the same can only be resolved by taking oral and documentary evidence. I direct the petitioner to approach before the appropriate Civil Court for claiming the relief, i.e. declaration of his right, title and interest over the land in question. 6. With this observation, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 15.04.2026 R.Kumar