I.A No.17020 of 2025

1. The instant interlocutory application has been filed for deletion of name of the respondent no.3(A), namely, Heera Orain @ Bundhain Orain-wife of original respondent no.3, namely, late Chola Oraon from the arrays of the respondent as she had died during pendency of the present writ petition.

2. It has been stated that the said information has been given orally on behalf of the private respondent during hearing of the present proceeding in the Court on 10.12.2025 when the matter was listed for haring. Thereafter, the instant injterlocutory application has been filed for deletion of the name of Heera Orain @ Bundhain Orain whose legal heirs and successors have already been impleaded as respondent nos. 3(B), (C) and (D) in the present proceeding.

3. There is no opposition by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. Accordingly, I.A No.17020 of 2025 stands allowed.

5. Let the name of the respondent no.3(A), namely, Heera Orain @ Bundhain Orain be deleted from the arrays of the respondents.

6. Office to proceed accordingly.

7. I.A. No.17020 of 2025 stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) No.3358 of 2007

Prayer:

8. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred for the following reliefs:

“That in the instant writ application, the petitioner prays for quashing of order dated 17.4.2007 (Annexure-2) passed by the respondent no.2 in S.A.R. Revision Ranchi No.47/2007, whereby and whereunder the revision filed by the petitioner have been dismissed as being barred by limitation and the explanation given by the petitioner for condonation of delay has not been accepted resulting in dismissal of the revision application.”

Factual Matrix

9. The brief facts of the case as per the pleadings made in the writ petition reads as under:

(i) The petitioners had filed revision application S.A.R. Revision Ranchi No. 47 of 2007 before the respondent no.2 against the order dated 08.09.2006 passed by Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi in SAR. Appeal No. 217 (R) 15 of 1999-2000 whereby and where under the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi restore the land in respect of Khata No.4, Plot Nos. 423, 1064, 1365, 1473, 1587, 1588, 1589, 1613, 1648, 1844, 1924 and 2037 having an area of 1.44 acres, 1.67 acres, 0.10 acre, 1.67 acres, 0.93 acres, 0.04 acres, 0.54 acres, 0.64 acre. 1.23 acres, 0.19 acres, 0.02 acres, 0.09 acres and 1.79 acres respectively situated at village Sero P.S. Bero District Ranchi in favour of respondent No.3.

(ii) The respondent no. 3 Chola Oraon (since deceased) had filed an application under section 46 of the Chotanagpur Tendency Act for giving permission to sale the land in favour of Lothe Bhagat, Biga Bhagat, Dhanu Bhagat, Sukra Bhagat before the rent suit Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi which was registered as Misc. Case No 65/R8 II R of 1990-91.

(iii) The respondent no.3 filed an application for sale of the land on the ground that the aforesaid lands are situated in village Pahar Kandaria because of the distance the respondent no.3 was facing great difficulty in cultivating the land therefore he wants to sale the land for a price of Rs 85,000/- and purchase a land at near by place in the village Soren.

(iv) On the said application of the respondent no. 3, a general notice was issued for inviting objection if any. Since no objection was filed by any of the person the competent authority accorded sanction under section 46 of CNT Act fixing Rs. 1,10,000/- as the price of the aforesaid land in terms of order dated 15.01.1991.

(v) Petitioners’ states that Dhanu Bhagat refused to get the sale deed executed in his favour with the father of the petitioner nos. 1 to 3 and Lothe Bhagat and Sukra Bhagat.

(vi) It is pleaded that the sons of Biga Bhagat requested the respondent no.3 to register and execute the sale deed in the proportionate share.

(vii) The respondent no.3 on the request of the petitioners and as per the agreement and contract execut