[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Arup Kumar Panda @ Arun Kr Panda Years vs The State Of Jharkhand on 15 April, 2026
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
2026:JHHC:10660
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 2600 of 2026
------
1. Arup kumar Panda @ Arun kr Panda years, aged about 58
years, S/o, Late Akhil Chandra Panda, R/O Rajrappa, P.O. &
P.S. Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
2. Ganesh Prasad Gupta, aged about 52, S/o Late Sugan Saw,
R/o Rajrappa, PO & PS-Rajrappa, District-Ramgarh.
3. Vijay Kumar Saw, S/o Nandlal Saw, R/o Rajrappa, PO & PS-
Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
4. Devdatta Khanna aged about 54 years, S/o Late Kesav
Trivhuvan Mahtha, R/o Rajrappa, P.O. & P.S. Rajrappa,
District Ramgarh.
5. Nageshwar Mahato, aged about 62 years, S/o Manu Mahato,
R/o Rajrappa, P.O. & P.S. Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
6. Ganesh Sao, age about 48, S/o Visun Sao, R/o Rajrappa, P.O.
& P.S. Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
7. Rahul Kumar Singh, age about 34, S/o Bahadur Singh, R/o
Rajrappa, P.O. & P.S. Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
8. Usha Devi, age about 53, W/o Parmeshwar Saw, R/o
Rajrappa, P.O. & P.S. Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
9. Pratima Devi, age about 46, W/o Dharmnath Mahato, R/o
Rajrappa P.O. & PS-Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
10. Dilip Kumar Sahu, aged about 57, S/o Sukhlal Saw, R/o
Rajrappa, P.O. & P.S. Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
11. Santosh Saw, aged about 42, S/o Lakhan Saw, R/o Rajrappa,
P.O. & P.S. Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
12. Bhuneshwar Saw, aged about 59, S/o Har Kishun Saw R/o
Rajrappa, P.O. & P.S. Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
13. Raj Kumar Saw, aged about 59, S/o Hari Kisun Saw, R/o
Rajrappa, P.O. & P.S. Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
14. Sandeep Kumar aged about 31, S/o late Lutan Saw, R/o
Rajrappa, P.O. & P.S. Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
15. Pratima Devi aged about 46, W/O Dharam nath Mahto aged
about R/o Rajrappa, P.O. & P.S. Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
16. Siddheswar Badal, aged about 63, S/O Late Vishwanath
Badal, R/o Rajrappa, P.O. & P.S.Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
17. Dilip Kumar Saw aged about 43, S/O Late nand kishore Saw,
R/o Rajrappa, P.O. & P.S. Rajrappa, District Ramgarh.
18. Pramod Kumar Chatterjee, aged about 49, S/o Binod Kumar
Chatterjee R/o Rajrappa, P.O. & P.S. Rajrappa, District
Ramgarh.
19. Ravi Prasad Gupta, aged about 37, S/o Khirodhar Saw, R/o
Rajrappa, PO & PS-Rajrappa, Dist-Ramgarh.
... ... Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh, P.O., P.S. & District
Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Ramgarh, P.O., P.S. & District
Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
4. The Circle Officer, Chitarpur, P.O. & P.S. Chitarpur, District
Ramgarh, Jharkhand. ... ... Respondent(s)
1
2026:JHHC:10660
With
W.P.(C) No. 2601 of 2026
------
1. Pradeep Saw, son of Lal Mohan Saw, aged about 44 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O.-Rajrappa, P.S.-Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
2. Tilak Saw, son of Lal Mohan Saw, aged about 46 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O. & PS-Rajrappa, -District- Ramgarh,
Jharkhand.
3. Ajay kumar Saw, son of Nandlal saw, aged about 36 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O.- Rajrappa, P.S.- Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
4. Nandlal Saw, son of late Narayan Saw, aged about 71 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O. Rajrappa, P.S.-Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand
5. Bajinath Singh, son of Late Janki Singh, aged about 73 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O.- Rajrappa, P.S.- Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand
6. Jyosna Devi Wife of Dipak Kumar Panda, aged about 66
years, resident of Rajrappa, P.O.- Rajrappa, P.S. Rajrappa,
District- Ramgarh, Jharkhand
7. Ishwar Mahto, son of Ratan Mahto, aged about 52 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O. Rajrappa, P.S. Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
8. Manoj Kumar Matho, son of Kishun Matho, aged about 38
years, resident of Rajrappa, P.O.- Rajrappa, P.S.- Rajrappa,
District- Ramgarh, Jharkhand
9. Shivam Gupta, son of Mahesh Prasad Gupta, aged about 30
years, resident of Rajrappa, P.O. Rajrappa, P.S.-Rajrappa,
District- Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
10. Deepak Kumar Panda, son of Rameshwar Panda aged about
68 years, resident of RajrappaP.O.- Rajrappa, P.S.- Rajrappa,
District- Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
11. Gaurav Kumar Panda, son of Deepak Panda, aged about 35
years, resident of Rajrappa, P.O. Rajrappa, P.S.-Rajrappa,
District Ramgarh, Jharkhand
12. Moti Singh, son of Govind Singh, aged about 53 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O.-Rajrappa, P.S.- Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand
13. Piyaso Devi, Wife of Nandkishor Saw, aged about 59 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O.- Rajrappa, P.S.- Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand
14. Pancham Matho, son of Ramjatan Mahto, aged about 53
years, resident of Rajrappa, P.O. Rajrappa, P.S.-Rajrappa,
District- Ramgarh, Jharkhand
15. Chitranjan Singh, son of Mahavir Singh, aged about 62 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O. Rajrappa, P.S.-Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
16. Govind Saw son of NarayanSaw, aged about 56 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O.-Rajrappa, P.S.- Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
17. Suraj Kumar Saw, son of Pardeep Saw, aged about 26 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O. Rajrappa, P.S.-Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
2
2026:JHHC:10660
18. Nageshwar Saw, son of Vishun Saw, aged about 52 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O.- Rajrappa, P.S.- Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
19. Ramchandra Saw, son of Bado Saw, aged about 75 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O.- Rajrappa, P.S.- Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand
20. Dinesh Saw son of Jitram Mahto, aged about 37 years,
resident of Rajrappa, P.O.- Rajrappa, P.S.- Rajrappa, District-
Ramgarh, Jharkhand. ... ... Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh, P.O., P.S. & District
Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Ramgarh, P.O., P.S. & District
Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
4. The Circle Officer, Chitarpur, P.O. & P.S. Chitarpur, District -
Ramgarh, Jharkhand. ... ... Respondent(s)
------
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
------
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Radha Krishan Gupta, Advocate
Mrs. Pinky Shaw, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Mohan Kr. Dubey, AC to AG
Mr. P.C. Sinha, Advocate
Mr. R.K. Roy, AC to GA-III
Mr. Mihir Kunal Ekka, AC to SC-I
------
th
02/ 15 April, 2026
1. Defect(s) is ignored.
2. Heard the parties.
3. The petitioners have only been noticed to remove the
encroachment in an around the Maa Chhinnamastike Temple at
Rajrappa.
4. In WP(PIL) No.6341 2022, which was in relation to
beautification of the Temple area and removal of encroachment,
this Court gave several directions while disposing the same, which
are as follows:-
"7. Considering the aforesaid position, we intend to give the
following directions to the Department of Tourism, Government
of Jharkhand and the District Administration, Ramgarh for
immediate compliance: -
(i) To construct adequate number of permanent proper
bathing ghats on both the sides of river Bhairavi;
(ii) Approach road from each of the ghats to the temple
should be free from all encroachments and obstructions;
2026:JHHC:10660
(iii) To construct adequate number of changing rooms
near the ghats at appropriate places. Ghats and changing
rooms should be properly maintained giving special
emphasis to cleanliness and hygiene;
(iv) Both the banks of river Bhairavi should be provided
with proper lighting facility;
(v) Toilets and washrooms in the queue complex should
be maintained by the respondents;
(vi) Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh will constitute a
team of responsible officers, who will inspect the temple
area to find out whether there are sufficient numbers of
waiting halls and sufficient number of toilets for all
genders. If it is felt that the toilets and washrooms are
not adequate, appropriate area should be identified for
construction of toilets and washrooms for all genders, but
the said toilets should not disturb in any way the temple
nor should come in the way of beautification of the
temple;
(vii) The respondents also should provide adequate
drinking water facility at regular intervals for the pilgrims;
(viii) First-aid medical facility should be made available
round the clock near the temple area and during the
festive season, mobile outlets should be made available,
which should be placed at the river front on both the
banks of river Bhairavi;
(ix) To widen the river banks and remove the hindrances,
encroachment and obstructions to reach the temple from
the Ghats or any other appropriate approach roads and if
makeshift shops needs to be removed, they should be
removed and the persons displaced should be relocated
at proper places;
(x) To take such other or further steps as is conducive to
beautify the temple complex and its surroundings
including the river front / bank."
5. Paragraph No.7(ix) of the aforesaid order clearly
directed the State to remove the makeshift shops and further
direction was given that the displaced should be relocated at
proper places. This order was passed on 11.08.2023 and only in
the year 2026 and the respondent-State woke up from their deep
slumbers and issued notice to the encroachers.
6. Be it noted that the Rajrappa Mandir Vyapar Sangh
approached Hon'ble Supreme Court against the order passed by
this Court in WP(PIL) No.6341 of 2022 but they withdrew the same
with a liberty to approach the High Court/Administration.
2026:JHHC:10660
7. The fact remains that the shops which have been
constructed unauthorizedly needs to be removed immediately and
further also the persons who are being removed must be identified
and as per the direction given by the Division Bench of this Court
must be rehabilitated. Thus, I am not interfering with the
proceedings which the respondents have initiated to remove the
encroachments but once the makeshift shops are removed, the
displaced should be immediately allotted proper place and they
should be rehabilitated.
8. It is made clear that the re-allocated space should be
provided strictly within a month from the date of their removal.
9. It is also made clear that only the persons who are
occupying the area will be re-habilitated, it is not that a new person
should be allotted place in the name of rehabilitation, leaving the
person who were removed.
10. With the aforesaid observations, these writ petitions
stand disposed of.
(ANANDA SEN, J.)
15.04.2026
S.K.D/CP-2
Uploaded on 16.04.2026
