PROTIMA MOYEE SADHU KHAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD .

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No. 6 directly moved the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Rajmahal (for short "the D.C.L.R.") for mutation who by order dated 11.7.1997 (Annexure 7) recommended her case for mutation, though petitioner 'sapplication for mutation was pending before the Circle Officer, Rajmahal, who was the competent authority.

(3.) IN reply, it is submitted that respondent No. 6 has not brought on record any document to show that the Circle Officer, in fact, refused to entertain the petition of respondent No. 6.