2026:JHHC:24041-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No. 643 of 2025 1. The State of Jharkhand represented through the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, having its office at Collectorate Building, Kutchery, P.O. G.P.O., Ranchi, P.S. Kotwali, Ranchi, District Ranchi. 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, having its office at Collectorate Building, Kutchery, P.O. G.P.O., Ranchi, P.S. Kotwali, Ranchi, District Ranchi. 3. The Circle Officer, Hehal, Ranchi, P.O. Hehal, P.S. Sukhdeo Nagar, District Ranchi. ... Appellants Versus Indradeo Munda, son of Late Aghanu Munda, resident of Village - Kathargonda, P.O. & P.S. - Gonda, District - Ranchi. ... Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR --------- For the Appellants: Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar, A.C. to A.A.G-III. --------- 02/Dated: 12.08.2026 1. Heard Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar, learned A.C. to A.A..G-III for the appellants-State. 2. I.A. No. 13527 of 2025 seeks condonation of delay of 258 days in instituting the accompanying appeal.

3. We have perused the averments in the I.A. and we are not satisfied that any sufficient cause has been shown. The application only refers to movement of files from one officer to the other and from one table to the other. Based upon such routine reasons and bureaucratic procedures delay of 258 days in filing the accompanying appeal cannot be condoned. Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar however submits that the appellants have a good case on merits and the learned Single Judge has directed the Circle Officer to mutate the land in question based on a decree in a Title Suit favouring the respondent herein without appreciating that such Page 1 of 2 2026:JHHC:24041-DB decree is already appealed against by the State Government. 4. The record shows that the respondent has obtained a decree from the civil court in a Title Suit declaring him the owner of the property in question. The State Government was very much a party to this suit and unless, such decree is set aside or stayed, the same finds the State Government. Admittedly, no interim relief has been obtained in the Title Appeal filed by the State Government. Therefore, as of now, the Circle Officer cannot refuse to mutate the land in question based on the civil court’s decree in the Title Suit. 5. However, such mutation, will always be subject to the outcome of the Title Appeal or any interim orders therein if obtained in the meanwhile.

6. Therefore, Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar’s contentions that there is something drastically wrong with the view taken by the learned Single Judge cannot be accepted and the delay, for which there is no sufficient cause, cannot be condoned. 7. Accordingly the I.A. and the accompanying appeal are dismissed without any order for costs. 8. Other pending IAs in this appeal will not survive and are disposed of. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 12.08.2026 N.A.F.R. APK/VK Uploaded on 14.08.2026 Page 2 of 2