( 2026:JHHC:11080 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 626 of 2024 ------ Uma Shankar Mandal, aged about 48 years, son of late Yogi Mandal, resident of Village-Nawadih, P.O.-Nawadih, P.S.- Saraiyahat, Dist.-Dumka (Jharkhand) … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Commissioner, Santhal Parganas Division, Dumka, P.O.+P.S. & Dist.-Dumka 3. The Settlement Officer, Dumka, P.O.+P.S. & Dist.-Dumka 4. The Assistant Settlement Officer, Saraiyahat (West), P.O.+P.S.-Saraiyahat, Dist.-Dumka 5. Makdam Raut 6. Shrikant Raut Both son of late Chaprasi Raut 7. Sarveshwar Raut, son of Raghu Raut 8. Sushil Raut, son of Raghu Raut 9. Arun Raut, son of Raghu Raut All resident of Village-Nawadih, P.O.-Nawadih, P.S.- Saraiyahat, Dist.-Dumka (Jharkhand) 10. Rukmani Devi, wife of Mahendra Mahamarik, daughter of late Raghu Raut, resident of Village+P.O.-Lakarbank, P.S.- Saraiyahat, Dist.-Dumka 11. Mani Devi, wife of Janamjai Raut, daughter of late Raghu Raut, resident of Village-Kakni, P.O.-Nawadih, P.S.- Saraiyahat, Dist.-Dumka 12. Sumitra Devi, wife of Wakil Mahto, daughter of Chaprasi Raut, resident of Village-Mohni, P.O.-Puriya, P.S.- Poriyahat, Dist.-Godda 13. Shambhu Raut 14. Arvind Raut Both sons of late Banarshi Raut, resident of Village + P.O.- Nawadih, P.S.-Saraiyahat, Dist.-Dumka 15. Shanti Devi, wife of Damdam Chaudhary, resident of Village-Kadya, P.O.-Kendua, P.S.-Saraiyahat, Dist.-Dumka 16. Bhupal Raut 17. Kailash Raut 18. Vishwanath Raut All sons of Ravindra Raut, resident of Village + P.O.- Nawadih, P.S.-Saraiyahat, Dist.-Dumka (Jharkhand) … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Ms. Rita Kumari, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Kishore Kr. Singh, SC V : Mr. Vishnu P. Pathak, AC to SC V : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Pandey, Advocate : Mr. Anurag Kumar, Advocate ------ Order No.05 Dated- 17.04.2026 Heard the parties. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this civil miscellaneous petition has been filed at the instance of the petitioner for restoration of W.P. (C) No. 4802 of 2018 to its original file. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that W.P. (C) No. 4802 of 2018 was dismissed for non- compliance of peremptory order of filing requisites. It is next submitted that due to the mistake on the part of the Advocate’s Clerk, the said requisites could not be filed within the stipulated time and the same resulted in dismissal of W.P. (C) No. 4802 of 2018. It is next submitted that the petitioner herein has very good grounds to agitate in the said W.P. (C) No. 4802 of 2018 and unless W.P. (C) No. 4802 of 2018 is restored to its original file, the petitioner will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the W.P. (C) No. 4802 of 2018 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that the petitioner is deliberately delaying the matter and harassing the opposite parties by lingering the same. Hence, the opposite parties be adequately compensated with costs. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, W.P. (C) No. 4802 of 2018 is restored to its original file to the stage at which, it was before its dismissal subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- by the petitioner to the opposite parties through the counsel appearing in the record, within eight weeks, failing which, this conditional order shall not be given effect to and this civil miscellaneous petition shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench. In case, the petitioner files the proof of payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- by the petitioner to the opposite parties through the counsel appearing in the record, within eight weeks, list W.P. (C) No. 4802 of 2018 under the appropriate heading after a week before the appropriate Bench. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 17.04.2026 Gunjan-