Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 859 (JHR)

RAJAN GUPTA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cont.(Cvl)/898/2025 · 2026-01-09

Rajesh Shankar

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:561 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No. 898 of 2025 --- Rajan Gupta, son of Shreelal Sahu, resident of village Bartanr, LIG Plot No. 42, Housing Colony, Sardar Patel Nagar, Dhanbad … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Sri Shashi Kant Sinker, Circle Officer, Dhanbad Circle, Dhanbad CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sidharth Sudhanshu, Advocate For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Ankit Kumar, A.C. to S.C.-I Order No. 05 Dated: 09.01.2026 The present contempt petition has been filed for initiation of contempt proceeding as against the opposite party no. 2 alleging willful violation of order dated 27.02.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 381 of 2025. 2. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 refers to order dated 11.12.2025 passed by the opposite party no. 2 in Misc. Case No. 08 of 2025-2026 (part of Annexure-A series to the show cause affidavit dated 16.12.2025) whereby the petitioner’s representation seeking correction in the details of the land in question entered in the online Register-II has been considered and has been partly allowed. 3. On this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be given liberty to challenge the order dated 11.12.2025 to the extent his claim over the part of the land in question has been rejected by the opposite party no. 2. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering that the opposite party no. 2 has already passed a reasoned order dated 11.12.2025, there is no need to further proceed in the present contempt matter. 2 5. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite party no. 2 is hereby dropped. 6. The contempt petition is accordingly disposed of. 7. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse as permissible under law against the order dated 11.12.2025 passed by the opposite party no. 2 whereby his claim over the part of the land in question has been rejected. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) January 09, 2026 Ritesh/