Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6237 (JHR)

POONAM KARMAKAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND, THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF JHARKHAND

WPC/2432/2026 · 2026-04-15

Sri Ananda Sen

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:10667 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(C) No.2432 of 2026 ----- 1. Poonam Karmakar, Wife of Late Ranjay Karmakar, aged about 39 years, R/o H.No.-01, Kumputa Basti, P.O. + P.S. Telco, Jamshedpur, Dist. East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 2.Abhishek Karmakar, Aged 24, Son of Late Ranjay Karmakar, aged about 30 years, R/o H.No.-01, Kumputa Basti, P.O. + P.S. Telco, Jamshedpur, Dist. East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 3. Bhim Karmakar, Aged 56 years, Son of Late Murti Karmakar, R/o Holding No. 01, Kamputa Basti, Telco, P.O. + P.S. Telco, Jamshedpur, Dist. East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 4.Kishore Karmakar, Aged 56, Son of Late Murti Karmakar, R/o Holding No. 01, Kamputa Basti, Telco, P.O. P.S. Telco, Jamshedpur, Dist. East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 5.Bhola Karmakar, Aged 50, Son of Late Murti Karmakar, R/o Holding No. 01, Kamputa Basti, Telco, P.O. + P.S. Telco, Jamshedpur, Dist. East Singhbhum, Jharkhand … Petitioner(s). Versus 1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O: Dhurva, P.S: Jaganathpur, Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand-834004. 2.THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O: Dhurva, P.S: Jagarnathpur, Dist: Ranchi, Jharkhand 834004. 3.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, East Singhbhum, New Collectorate Building, P.O & P.S Sakchi, Dist: East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 4.THE CIRCLE OFFICER, Jamshedpur Circle, P.O & P.S Sakchi, Dist: East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. … Respondent(s). CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shresth Gautam, Advocate Mr. Prashant Jha, Advocate Mr. Padmanav Shahdeo, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Utpal Kant, Advocate …...... 02 /15.04.2026: Heard the learned counsel representing the petitioner and the learned counsel representing the respondents. 2. It is the grievance of the petitioner that Mutation Case No. 1188/2015-16 has been allowed in favour of the petitioner but the online entries does not commensurate with the order passed in the Mutation case No. 1188/2015-16. 2026:JHHC:10667 2 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that if there is any genuine error the same will be considered and if it is found that the same needs to be rectified the same will be done in consonance with the order passed in Mutation Case No. 1188/2015-16. 4. Considering the said submission, I direct the petitioner to approach the Circle Officer, Jamshedpur Circle within four weeks along with the order of this Court, who will consider the case of the petitioner and if it is found that the claim of the petitioner is genuine, he will take appropriate action within four weeks thereafter. 5. If the claim of the petitioner is rejected for any reasons whatsoever the reasons should be communicated to the petitioner within a period of four weeks thereafter. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 15.04.2026 Tanuj/CP-2 Uploaded on 18.04.2026