Md. Mumtaz Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 4748 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Md. Mumtaz Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 15 April, 2025

Author: Rajesh Shankar

Bench: Rajesh Shankar

                                                   2025:JHHC:11376-DB


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      L.P.A No. 601 of 2024

     Md. Mumtaz Ansari, S/o Md. Amin Ansari, R/o Village-Ray, PO-Ray,
     PS-Khalari, District-Ranchi               ...    ...     Appellant
                                      Versus
     1. The State of Jharkhand
     2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration
        and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
     3. The Central Coalfields Limited, through its Chairman-cum-
        Managing Director, Darbhanga House, Ranchi
     4. The General Manager, North Karnpura Area, Central Coalfields
        Limited, Khalari, Ranchi
     5. The General Manager (L & R), Central Coalfields Limited,
        Darbhanga House, Ranchi
     6. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi
     7. The Circle Officer, Khalari, Ranchi ...       ...     Respondents
        CORAM:              HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
                                         -----

For the Appellant : Mr. Vinay Kumar, Advocate Mr. Manish Ranjan, Advocate For the Respondent-State : Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, AC to AG For the Respondent-CCL : Mr. A.K. Das, Advocate Mr. Shivam Utkarsh Sahay, Adv.

-----

03/15.04.2025 Heard both the sides.

2. Perused the impugned order dated 16.07.2024 passed

by learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 5028 of 2011.

According to the pleadings of the appellant, he was

only a daily wages employee, who along with his ancestors had

long back shifted to the State of Gujarat. He claims to have

returned to his residence recently and had come to know that

certain lands belonging to his ancestors have been illegally

possessed by the respondents without providing any compensation

and employment.

The use of the subject land by the respondents is

admitted at least from 1973 i.e. since passing of the Coal Mines

(Nationalization) Act, 1973.

2025:JHHC:11376-DB

Since the appellant was not even born at that point of

time, it appears that his claim is purely speculative and he is

seeking to revive claims which are hopelessly barred under the said

law at this point of time.

3. Though learned counsel for the appellant has relied on

few judgments, in the facts and circumstances of the case, in view

of our finding that the claim of the appellant is totally speculative, it

is not necessary to deal with the said judgments.

4. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

(M. S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.)

(Rajesh Shankar, J.) Manish/Ritesh