2026:JHHC:10143 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 2345 of 2026 -------

1. Umesh Kumar Modi, aged about 45 years, S/O- Banshi Modi, R/o Vill-

Basdharwa, P.O-Lokai, P.S- Koderma, Dist- Koderma.

2. Shakuntala Devi, aged about 63 years, W/O-Kauleshwar Lal Modi, R/o Vill- Baddiha, P.O-Lokai, P.S- Koderma, Dist- Koderma.

3. Shyam Sundar Modi, aged about 50 years, S/O-Maharaj Modi, R/o Gandhi School Road, WardNo. 23, P.O- Jhumri Telaiya, P.S- Telaiya, Dist-Koderma. 4. Vinita Burnwal @ Kumari Vinita Burnwal aged about 43 years, W/O-

Sambhu Modi, R/o Vill- Chano, P.O- Rupaydih, P.S- Birni, Dist-Giridih.

5. Kishun Modi @ Krishna Modi, aged about 48 Vill years, S/O- Late Khedan Modi, R/o Mangaso P.O- Argali P.S- Dhanbar, Dist-Giridih.

.... Petitioner(s).

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand.

2. The Deputy Commissioner, Koderma, P.O. & P.S.& District- Koderma.

3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Koderma, P.O., P.S. & District- Koderma.

4. The Circle Officer, Koderma Anchal, Koderma, P.O.-Jhumri Telaiya &

P.S.-Telaiya, District-Koderma … Respondents.

-------

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate Ms. Kumari Priyambada, Advocate Ms. Micky Kumari, Advocate For the Respondent : Ms. Rishi Bharti, AC to AAG-III ------

02/ 09.04.2026: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents.

2. It is the grievance of the petitioners that only after affixing press notice (Annexure-4), the respondents are taking steps to demolish the construction. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no opportunity of personal hearing was given to the petitioners, no proceeding at all was initiated. There is no order passed by any quasi-judicial or judicial authority, declaring the petitioner to be an encroacher. In absence of any such proceeding and order, the respondents cannot demolish the building of the petitioners only on issuing a general notice, affixed on the boundary wall outside the house of the petitioners.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 3 have purchased the land pertaining to Khata No.220, Plot No.5989/6247, Mouza Gumo, P.S. Telaiya, Thana No.12, measuring an area of 08 decimals, 04 decimals and 2.50 decimals situated at Koderma District. Further the petitioner Nos.4 and 5 have purchased the land pertaining to Khata No.220, Plot No.5989/6247, Mouza Gumo, P.S. Telaiya, Thana No.12 measuring an area of 08 decimals and 04 decimals situated at District Koderma through different registered deeds dated 01.07.2010 and 03.07.2010 respectively, thus they have title over the property and there is no encroachment. The aforesaid lands were purchased by respective sale deeds which are brought on record vide Annexure-1 series to the writ petition. Further, it is their case that they are residing there for the last 14 years.

5. The grievance of the petitioner is that recently an unsigned undated notice has been affixed on the boundary wall of the petitioners whereby the authorities informed the general public of that area that the land of Thana No.12, Mouza Gumo, Khata No.220, Khesra No.6211, 5925 and 5989 are recorded as gairmazarua khas land. It is informed that if any person has got any document in their favour in respect of the aforesaid land, they should appear before the authorities or else appropriate action would be taken as per law. The petitioners claim that pursuant to the said notice, the respondents came with the Bulldozer and demolished some part of the wall.

6. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State submits that the petitioners had to approach the appropriate authority but they did not rather they have approached this Court directly.

7. After going through the impugned notice, which is at Annexure-4, I find that the same is purported to be issued by the Circle Officer, Koderma. In the header of the notice, it has been mentioned as “press release”, which reads as follows:

“ -:: ঋेस िव৯्(cid:593) ::-

सव१ साधारण को सूिच