Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 870 (JHR)

Pinki Kumari @ Pinki Singh, daughter of Ramayodhya Singh, wife of Late Binay Kumar Singh v. State of Jharkhand

2025-03-11

RAJESH SHANKAR

body2025
Order : (Rajesh Shankar, J.) The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to make online entry of the petitioners’ land appertaining to new plot nos. 1517, 1521 (Old Plot No. 743), new Khata No. 105 (Old Khata No. 50) Mouza- Balardih, Mouza No. 284, District- Dhanbad measuring an area of 43 decimals in the official portal of the Government of Jharkhand maintaining the records of land. Further prayer has been made to direct the concerned respondents to issue continuous Khatiyan with respect to the aforesaid land in the name of the petitioners. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners purchased the land in question from one Ram Narayan Gupta vide registered sale deed no. 2990/2314 dated 30.07.2014 which was subsequently mutated in their name vide Mutation Case No. 88(xii)/14-15 entering their names in Register-II. Since then, they are in peaceful possession of the said land over which they have constructed a house and have been residing in the same for several years. 3. It is also submitted that the petitioners have paid rent of the said land to the State Government till the financial year 2014-15, in lieu of which the rent receipts have been issued to them, however since 2016, no rent receipt has been issued to them on the ground that the land in question has not been entered in the online portal of the State Government. Under the said circumstance, the petitioner represented the Circle Officer, East Tundi Circle, Dhanbad (the respondent no. 4) requesting inter alia to make online entry of the land in question in the official portal of the State Government as well as for issuance of continuous Khatiyan of the said land in their name, however no action has been taken by the said respondent in this regard, which has compelled them to prefer the present writ petition. 4. No one appears on behalf of the respondents. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and considering the nature of prayer made in the present writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioners are given liberty to prefer a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no. 4. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and considering the nature of prayer made in the present writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioners are given liberty to prefer a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no. 4. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no. 4, after verifying the relevant records and on providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioners/their representatives, shall take an appropriate informed decision in accordance with law within six weeks from the date of filing of the said representation. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction.