Jharkhand High Court
Md. Sahabuddin Aged About 45 Years Son Of ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 15 April, 2026
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
2026:JHHC:10716
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (C) No. 1169 of 2023
-------
Md. Sahabuddin aged about 45 years son of Late Md. Najir Ali, resident of
121 Mani Tola, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi. .... Petitioner(s).
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Kotwali, District Ranchi.
3. Circle Officer, Argora, P.O. and P.S. Argora, District Ranchi.
4. Md. Shahid, son of late Md. Hemile, resident of Mani Tola, P.O. & P.S.
Doranda, District Ranchi.
5. Md. Jahid, son of late Hemile, resident of Mani Tola, P.O. and P.S. Doranda,
Ranchi. ... Respondents.
-------
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
------
For the Petitioner(s) : Mrs. Neetu Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent :
------
14/ 15.04.2026: By filing this writ petition, the petitioner prays for a direction upon the respondents to take immediate steps for verifying and correction of online record of land of the petitioner because jamabandi has been running in the name of the mother of the petitioner Jaibun Nisha for the land situated at Ward No.49, Khata No.245, Plot No.269, 270, Mouza Hundru, P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, Area 1 Kattha, 13 Chhatak because at present online record showing excess area in the name of mother of the petitioner and instead of 1 katha, 13 Chhatak, in her name 15 decimals 7.1 Hector has been showing. Further, prays for a direction upon the respondents to do enquiry because respondent Nos.4 and 5 have illegally mutated/ entered their name in the online record of the land of the petitioner situated at Ward No.49, Khata No.245, Plot Nos.269, 270, Mouza Hundru, P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, Area 1 Katha, 13 Chhatak.
2. During course of argument, it has been brought to the notice of this Court by the counsel for the petitioner that online jamabandi needs correction as some excess land has been shown in the records. Further, the counsel for the petitioner submits that some of the lands have been recorded in the name of the stranger to the family.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the only son of the recorded tenant but after the death of the recorded tenant, some portion of the land has been mutated in the name of the persons who are foreign to the family based on some vague documents.
4. After hearing to the parties, I find that the respondent No.3-Circle Officer, Argora, Ranchi has passed an order of mutation. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said order as according to the petitioner the same should not have been recorded in the name of respondent Nos.4 and 5.
5. That being so, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the mutation order, he should have approached the Appellate Authority i.e. Land Reforms Deputy Collector. Without filing any appeal, he has rushed to this Court by filing an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Thus, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition.
6. The petitioner is directed to approach the Land Reforms Deputy Collector challenging the order by which the land has been mutated in favour of the respondent No.4 and 5. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector after hearing all concerned parties will pass an appropriate order.
7. So far as making necessary correction in the online records is concerned, the Land Reforms Deputy Collector will also consider the same and pass an appropriate order.
8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ application is disposed of.
(ANANDA SEN, J.) 15th April, 2026 Madhav/-
Uploaded on:18/04/2026 -2-