2026:JHHC:1363 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. No. 09 of 2007 West Bokaro Colliery (TISCO), now Tata Steel Limited, At. And P.O. Ghato, P.S. Mandu, District Hazaribagh. … … Opp. Party/Appellant Versus 1. Banka Manjhi, Son of Surjan Manjhi (substituted vide order dated 11.07.2023) 1(a) Chaita Manjhi, s/o Late Parwati Devi & late Sahebram Manjhi Resident of Bhutahi Tola, Village: Pundi, P.O. & P.S. Mandu, District: Ramgarh. 2. Kashi Nath Manjhi 3. Bhuneshwar Manjhi Nos. 2 & 3 Sons of Late Babu Ram Manjhi 4. Nandu Manjhi, Son of Late Dewan Manjhi (substituted vide order dated 11.07.2023) 4(a) Sanjhla Manjhi 4(b) Ruplal Manjhi Both sons of Late Nandu @ Nanhu Manjhi 4(c) Chitmuni Devi, w/o late Sonaram Manjhi All residents of village Pundi, P.O. Hesagara, District Hazaribagh. 5. Gaya Manjhi, Son of Mangra Manjhi (substituted vide order dated 11.07.2023) 5(a) Surji Manjhi, w/o late Parasnath Manjhi 5(b) Sumit Kumar Manjhi, s/o late Parasnath Manjhi, represented through his mother and natural guardian namely, Surji Manjhi Both residents of Bhutahi Tola, Village: Pundi, P.O. & P.S. Mandu, District: Ramgarh. 6. Basia Manjhi, Son of Manjho Manjhi (substituted vide order dated 11.07.2023) 6(a) Sanjhala Manjhi, s/o late Jitan Manjhi 6(b) Talo Manjhi, s/o late Jitan Manjhi 6(c) Aghnu Manjhi, s/o late Jitan Manjhi 6(d) Badki Devi, widow of late Sawna Manjhi 6(e) Sahdeo Hembrome, s/o late Sawna Manjhi (substituted vide order dated 11.07.2023) 6(e)(i) Nitu Devi, w/o late Sahdeo Hembrome, resident of village: Hesagarha, Bhutahi Tola, Pundi, P.O. & P.S. Mandu, District: Ramgarh. 6(f) Jajmuni Kumari, d/o late Sawna Manjhi 6(g) Sita Kumari, d/o late Sawna Manjhi 6(h) Nisha Kumari (minor) d/o late Sawna Manjhi 6(i) Asha Kumari (minor) d/o late Sawna Manjhi Asha Kumari and Nisha Kumari both minors are duly represented through their mother and natural guardian namely, Badki Devi. 2026:JHHC:1363 2 All residents of Bhutahi Tola, Village: Pundi, P.O. & P.S. Mandu, District: Ramgarh. 7. Tudu Manjhi, Son of Puran Manjhi 8. Talo Manjhi 9. Sanjhala Manjhi 10. Manjhala Manjhi Nos. 8 to 10 Sons of Puran Manjhi All resident of Village Pundi, P.O. + P.S. Mandu, District Hazaribagh. … … Applicants/Respondents 11. The State of Jharkhand, through the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh. … … Opp. Party/Respondent --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Appellant : Mr. Pratyush Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Nawal Kishore Pandey, AC to SC (L&C)-I --- 36/19.01.2026 Learned counsel for the parties are present. 2. This First Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 18.12.2006 and award dated 08.01.2007 passed by learned Sub-Judge II-cum-Special Judge, Land Acquisition, Hazaribagh making award under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act in Land Reference Case No. 133 of 1992 arising out of Land Acquisition Case No. 46 of 80- 81/ 21 of 88-89. 3. Learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that out of the same land acquisition proceedings, numerous land reference cases were instituted and common judgment was passed based on common evidence. They jointly submit that except the present appeal, all other appeals have been disposed of vide common judgment dated 16.08.2019 passed in F.A. No. 12 of 2007 and analogous cases [West Bokaro Colliery (TISCO), now Tata Steel Limited Vs. Kalim Ansari and others]. They jointly submit that the present appeal be also disposed of in the same terms. They have also submitted that all the cases were tried together and there were common witnesses and evidences in all the cases. 2026:JHHC:1363 3 4. This Court finds that in the impugned judgement dealing with 17 cases including the present one being Land Reference Case No. 133 of 1992, it has been recorded in paragraph 8 as under: - “8. In the instant reference proceeding 17 awards prepared by Land Acquisition Officer have been challenged and altogether 17 cases have been registered but for the sake of convenience the analogous trial is going on because entire land have been acquired in the village Pundi through the same notification for the same purpose for the benefit of TISCO.” 5. 17 appeals have been filed before this court. 6. Vide judgment dated 16.08.2019 passed in F.A. No. 12 of 2007 and analogous cases [West Bokaro Colliery (TISCO), now Tata Steel Limited Vs. Kalim Ansari and others] (supra), 16 out of 17 first appeals (except the present one) have been allowed in the following terms: - “18. Thus, from over all discussion, I hold that the compensation has to be paid to the land loosers at the rate of Rs.1000/- per decimal along with all other benefits in place of Rs.1,200/- per decimal as fixed vide the impugned judgment and award dated 18.12.2006 (award signed on 08.01.2007) passed by the Sub Judge II-cum-Special Judge, Land Acquisition, Hazaribagh in Land Reference Case Nos. 145 of 1992, 146 of 1992, 144 of 1992, 141 of 1992, 137 of 1992, 142 of 1992, 139 of 1992, 136 of 1992, 134 of 1992, 140 of 1992, 138 of 1992, 143 of 1992, 148 of 1992, 132 of 1992, 147 of 1992 and 135 of 1992, arising out of Land Acquisition Case No.46 of 1980-81 / 21 of 1988-89.” 7. Considering the aforesaid submissions and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this appeal is also allowed in the aforesaid terms and to the aforesaid extent. 8. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is closed. 9. Award to be prepared accordingly. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of order: 19.01.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading: 24.01.2026