Shankar Munda And Ors vs Energy Department

2026:JHHC:26287


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
----
W.P.(C) No.4048 of 2017
----
1.Shankar Munda, son of late Balku Munda
2.Bhola Prasad, son of Rameshwar Mahato
3.Deepak Munda, son of Bhola Munda
4.Yashvant Sagar son of Tileshwar Mahto
5.Pradeep Mahto, son of Madho Mahto
6.Ramchandra Munda, son of Jeetan Munda
7.Rajendra Kumar, son of Rameshwar Pahan
8.Jageshwar Pahan, son of Ramjit Pahan
9.Sanjay Munda, son of Gopal Munda
10.Surendra Nath Kushwaha, son of Bhuneshwar Munda,
11.Naresh Munda, son of Ganesh Munda
12.Preetam Munda, son of Laldeo Munda
13.Vikas Kumar, son of late Sohram Munda,
14.Sahdeo Munda, son of Majinath Munda
15.Lalu Pahan, son of Gajpath Pahan,
16.Shankar Munda, son of Mandeo Munda
17.Dhaneshwar Munda, Son of Dhengu Munda
18.Nageshwar Munda, son of Jagdish Munda
19.Kameshwar Munda, son of late Mahadeo Munda
20.Baldeo Munda, son of Rameshwar Munda
21.Sandeep Kumar Munda, son of late Jageshwar Munda
22.Rajesh Munda, son of Shankar Munda
23.Shankar Munda, son of Gopal Munda
24.Bhola Munda, son of late Balku Munda
25.Suresh Mahto, son of late Arjun Mahto
26.Santosh Munda, son of Bhola Munda
27.Ramesh Kumar, son of late Rambrit Pahan
1 W.P.(C) No.4048 of 2017

2026:JHHC:26287

28.Dhaneshwar Munda, son of late Tetra Munda
29.Naresh Munda, son of Jeetan Munda
30.Shivnath Munda, son of late Somar Munda
31.Ram Prasad Munda, son of late Pusa Munda
32.Mahabir Prasad, son of Rameshwar Mahto
33.Arjun Munda, son of Harinath Munda
34.Prayag Mahto son of late Jagan Mahto
35.Ranjay Muna, son of Gopal Munda
36.RAtho Munda, son of late Kaila Munda
37.Birbal Munda, son of late Sohrai Munda
38.Naresh Munda, son of Ratho Munda
39.Dhananjay Munda son of Rahto Munda
40.Arun Kumar, son of Rahto Munda
41.Nanku Munda, son of late Kashinath Munda
42.Sanjay Munda, son of Dhaneshwar Munda
43.Dhanraj Pahan, son of late Jaghan Pahan, All residents of
Village Hesla, PO -PTPS, PS Patratu, District Ramgarh,
Jharkhand …… …. .... Petitioner(s)
-- Versus --
1.The State of Jharkhand
2.Secretary, Department of Energy, Government of Jharkhand,
PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi
3.Chairman Cum Managing Director, Jharkhand Urja Vikas
Nigam Limited, Government of Jharkhand, PO and PS Dhurwa,
District Ranchi
4.Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh, PO and PS Ramgarh, District
Ranchi
5.Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh PO and PS Hazaribag,
District Hazaribag
6.District Land Acquisition Officer, Ramgarh, PO and PS
Ramgarh, District Ramgarh
2 W.P.(C) No.4048 of 2017

2026:JHHC:26287

7.District Land Acquisition Officer, Hazaribag, PO and PS
Hazaribag, District Hazaribag
8.General Manager, Patratu Thermal Power Station (PTPS), PO
PTPS, PS Patratu, District Ramgarh .... Respondents
----
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioner(s) :- Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Tiwari, Advocate
For the State :- Mr. Suresh Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the NTPC :- Miss Sumiran Srivastava, Advocate
----
12 /31.08.2026 This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India to command upon the respondents to
rehabilitate the petitioners as per the provisions of Right of Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation
and Resettlement Act, 2013 by re-calculating the Award for their
land as per the present market value. The prayer is also made to
return the land to the petitioners which was acquired for the
purpose of P.T.P.S which has not been utilized. The prayer has also
been made for employment in terms of the Policy.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are the tribals and only 12.59 acres of land has been
acquired for construction of Thermal Power Station which has been
further taken by the NTPC and that has occurred in the year 1961-
62. He next submits that, however, the entire village namely, Hesla
was being disturbed and there is apprehension that the persons
whose lands have not been acquired, they will also be disturbed.
3 W.P.(C) No.4048 of 2017

2026:JHHC:26287

3. The learned counsel for the respondent State as well as
the learned counsel for the respondent-NTPC submit that the land
has already been acquired and compensation has also been paid.
4. In view of above, it appears that the dispute is there
with regard to rest of the land of the Village-Hesla and that cannot
be a subject matter under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
and in that view of the matter, the petitioners are directed to appear
before the respondent nos.4 and 5 by way of filing fresh
representation.
5. The Deputy Commission, Ramgarh is hereby directed not
to disturb the other raiyats whose lands have not been acquired and
for that, the petitioners shall approach the respondent nos.4 and 5
by way of filing fresh representation within three weeks from today
and the Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh shall take into account the
submission of the petitioners and will pass the appropriate reasoned
order in accordance with law within eight weeks further thereafter.
6. With the above observation and direction, this writ
petition is disposed of.
7. Pending petition, if any, also stands disposed of.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Dated : 31.08.2026
SI/

4 W.P.(C) No.4048 of 2017