2026:JHHC:2121-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.156 of 2026 ----- Raj Yashi Construction Private Limited, having its registered office at Babugaon Road, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. and P.S. Korra, District Hazaribagh through its Director, Shivlal Mahto, son of Late Bigan Mahto, resident of Babugoan Road, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. and P.S. Korra, District-Hazaribagh. .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. Coal India Ltd., through its Chief Managing Director, having its registered office at Coal Bhawan Premise No.04 MAR, Plot No.- AF-III. Action Area-1A. Newton, P.O. & P.S. Rajarhart, District Kolkata. 2. Central Coalfields Limited, (a subsidiary of Coal India Limited), represented by Chairman-cum-Managing Director, having its office at Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, P.O. & P.S. Kutchery Road, District-Ranchi. 3. The General Manager (CMC), Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, Kutchery Road, P.O. GPO, P.S. Kotwali, District-Ranchi. 4. The General Manager, Central Coalfields Limited, Kuju Area, P.O. Kuju, P.S. Ghato, District-Ramgarh. 5. Project Officer, Sarubera West OCP (Sarubera Project), Central Coalfields Limited, Kuju Area, P.O. Kuju, P.S. Ghato, District- Ramgarh. 6. M/s. Krishna Infrastructure, a partnership firm having its registered office at 101104, Panchvati Point Complex, Opposite Mansrovar Building, PN Marg, P.O. and P.S. Jamnagar, District Jamnagar, State-Gujarat, represented through its partner Mr. Karshanbhai Devabhai Karmur, resident of 101104, Panchvati Point Complex, Opposite Mansrovar Building, PN Marg, P.O. and P.S. Jamnagar, District Jamnagar, State-Gujarat. .......... Respondents. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mrs. Niharika Mazumdar, Advocate For the CCL : Mr. A.K. Das, Advocate ----- Order No.02 Date: 28.01.2026 1. The petitioner is a sub-contractor of 6th respondent. Both the petitioner and the 6th respondent are private entities that they do not answer the definition of the State within meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of the India. 2026:JHHC:2121-DB 2 2. The dispute has arisen between the petitioner and the 6th respondent. Such dispute, cannot be adjudicated by us in exercise of our writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India. Even otherwise, resolution of such a dispute would involve adjudication into disputed questions of fact. 3. Upon this being pointed out, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction, seeks leave to withdraw this petition with liberty to file appropriate proceeding before the appropriate forum for resolution of the petitioner’s disputes. 4. We think that it would be a proper course of action to adopt. Accordingly, leave is granted and this petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. 5. The contentions of all the parties on merits and demerits of dispute are left open because we have not examined or adjudicated upon. 6. No costs. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 28th January, 2026 Sanjay/Rohit Uploaded on 30.01.2026