[2026:JHHC:1181] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No.912 of 2025 ------ Bijay Kant Rout aged about 64 years son of Late Huro Rout, resident of village Kakni, P.O. Nawadih, P.S. Saraiyahat, District Dumka. … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Dumka, P.O. and P.S. Dumka, District Dumka. 3. The Deputy Collector, Dumka, P.O. and P.S. Dumka, District Dumka. 4. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Dumka, P.O. and P.S. Dumka, District Dumka. 5. Circle Officer Saraiyahat, P.O. and P.S. Saraiyahat, District Dumka. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, SC IV Mr. Divyam, AC to SC IV ------ Order No:-03 Dated:-16-01-2026 Heard the parties. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer for restoration of C.M.P. No. 889 of 2024 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 18.10.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that C.M.P. No. 889 of 2024 stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 18.10.2024. It is next submitted that the petitioner of C.M.P. No. 889 of 2024 was directed to file a supplementary affidavit; for non-filing of which, W.P.(C) No. 2931 of 2020 has been dismissed within two weeks from the date of that order. It is then submitted that as the petitioner could not come to Ranchi to swear the supplementary affidavit due to personal problem, hence, the said supplementary affidavit could not be filed within the stipulated time; which resulted in dismissal of the said C.M.P. No. 889 of 2024 for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 18.10.2024. It is further submitted that non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 18.10.2024 was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the petitioner has very good grounds to agitate in the said C.M.P. No. 889 of 2024 and unless the same is restored to its original file, the petitioner will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the C.M.P. No. 889 of 2024 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel for the opposite parties on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioner for restoration of the said C.M.P. No. 889 of 2024 and submits that the opposite parties will unnecessarily be harassed if the same is restored to its original file, hence, the opposite parties be compensated adequately. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, C.M.P. No. 889 of 2024 is directed to be restored to its original file at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal subject to payment of cost of Rs.1,000/- by the petitioner to the opposite parties through their learned counsel appearing in the record within four weeks from the date of this order. Registry is directed to list C.M.P. No. 889 of 2024 before the concerned Bench after four weeks only if the petitioner pays the cost of Rs.1,000/- to the opposite parties through their learned counsel appearing in the record within four weeks from the date of this order and files the proof of the same in this case; failing which, this conditional order shall not be given effect to and C.M.P. No. 889 of 2024 shall remain dismissed. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 16.01.2026 Saroj/