Poonam Shrivastava Wife Of Late Sanjay Kumar v. State Of Jharkhand
2019-02-28
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
body2019
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT Sujit Narayan Prasad, J. - This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the respondent to make necessary correction in the online entry made with respect to the registered II documents about the land in question situated at Mauja-Sabalpur, Mauja No.11, Khata No.39 (New Khata No.139), Plot No.600, Area-6 Kattha out of total area of 1.71 acres in District-Dhanbad. 2. Learned counsel for the State-respondents has submitted that this writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and without exhausting the remedy i.e. without making any demand, the same has been filed, therefore, at this stage, it is not maintainable. 3. Mr. Rishi Pallav, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he may be allowed to approach before the authority for making appropriate application in order to ventilate his grievance. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the submission advanced on behalf of the State counsel, I find substance in his arguments, since the extraordinary jurisdiction conferred to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to be invoked after exhausting all the remedy available, but admittedly herein, the petitioner has not raised any demand and therefore, there is no question of any inaction on the part of the authority and as such, no commandment can be issued at this stage, however the petitioner is given liberty to approach before the Circle Officer, Sadar Dhanbad-respondent No.4 by filing appropriate application giving therein all details within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 5. The Circle Officer shall take decision in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. 6. In view thereof, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the liberty aforesaid.