IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (C) No. 6021 of 2008
Chandra Nath Singh ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad
3. Circle Officer-cum-Block Development
Officer, Baghmara, P.O. & P.S. -Baghmara,
District- Dhanbad
4. Sub-Divisional Officer(Sadar), District-Dhanbad
5. Superintendent of Police, Dhanbad
6. Sri Ashok Chourasia s/o Late Baijnath Prasad
Chourasia
7. Sri Ashok Kr. Ojha s/o Late Balmiki Ojha ... Respondents
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.PATEL
---------
For the petitioner: M/s Anil Kr. Sinha, M.K.Laik, Sr.
Advocates & Smita Mitra, Advocate
For the State: Mr. L.K.Lal, SC (L & C)
---------
05/ Dated: 8th October, 2009
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner is claiming ownership upon the properties,
which are referred at Annexure 1/A to the memo of
present petition. There are several plots upon which the
petitioner is claiming ownership and title on the basis of
various documents and it is submitted that a Public
Interest Litigation was preferred by some persons and a
writ petition bearing W.P.(PIL) No. 2561 of 2007 was
instituted before this Court for removal of the
encroachments upon the properties, upon which the
petitioner is claiming ownership and the following order
was passed in the said Public Interest Litigation, by this
Court:
“In view of the fact that the Deputy
Commissioner has filed affidavit mentioning the
steps taken, we do not find any reason to keep
this PIL pending. The Deputy Commissioner is
directed to continue the steps undertaken by
taking action and pass orders in accordance
with law as expeditiously as possible.
With this direction, this PIL is disposed of.
Let copies of this order be given to the
counsel appearing for the parties.”
2. The aforesaid order was passed on 10th January, 2008. It
is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
thereafter a direction has also been given by the Deputy
Commissioner, Dhanbad, for removal of the
encroachment with the help of the police force, but, the
2.
petitioner is residing on the properties, which are
narrated at Annexure 1/A to the memo of present
petition, as the owner of the properties and, therefore, a
detailed representation dated 27th June, 2008 has been
filed, which is at Annexure 4 to the memo of present
petition, and it is submitted that without deciding the
said representation, the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad,
cannot remove the petitioner, as the petitioner is not an
encroacher at all. It is further submitted that under the
excuse of removal of encroachment, the Deputy
Commissioner, Dhanbad, may not remove even the
owners of the properties and, therefore, this petitioner
has been preferred, with a prayer that let the Deputy
Commissioner, Dhanbad, decide the claim of the present
petitioner upon the properties, narrated at Annexure 1/A
to the memo of present petitioner and, thereafter, action
may be initiated, in accordance with law, rules,
regulations, policies and the government enforceable
orders, applicable in the facts of the present case.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the State Mr. Lal, who
has submitted that the respondents are duty bound to
remove the encroachment, as per the order of this Court.
Nonetheless, if the petitioner is claiming title and
ownership upon the properties, as stated hereinabove, the
representation of the petitioner at Annexure 4 to the
memo of present petition dated 27th June, 2008 will be
decided by the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, in
accordance with law, rules, regulations, policies and the
government enforceable orders, applicable in the facts of
the present case. It is also submitted by the learned
counsel Mr. Lal that the contentions raised in the memo
of present petition are not accepted by the respondents
and they are denied in totality.
4. Learned counsel Mr. Lal on behalf of the State submitted
that as expeditiously as possible, the Deputy
Commissioner, Dhabnad, will decide the claim of the
present petitioner, upon the properties, narrated at
Annexure 1/A to the memo of present petition.
5. Learned counsel for the submitted that the petitioner will
cooperate with the hearing before the Deputy
3.
Commissioner, Dhanbad, and no unnecessary
adjournment will be asked for.
6. In view of the aforesaid submissions and looking to the
order, passed by this Court in W.P.(PIL) No. 2561 of 2007
dated 10th January, 2008, as stated hereinabove, and
looking to the representation at Annexure 4 to the memo
of present petition, I hereby direct respondent no.2, the
Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, to hear the petitioner or
his representative and decide the representation at
Annexure 4 to the memo of present petition, in
accordance with law, rules, regulations, policies and the
government enforceable orders, applicable to the facts of
the present case and such decision will be taken by the
Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, as expeditiously as
possible, preferred within a period of twelve weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of the order of this Court and
the petitioner will cooperate with the hearing and will not
ask for unnecessary adjournment, so that the time
schedule be scrupulously adhered to by respondent no.2.
7. Meanwhile, the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, is
hereby restrained from demolishing the super-structure,
which may be of the nature of Kachha construction,
Pucca construction or shade in nature etc. or the like, on
the properties, narrated at Annexure 1/A to the memo of
present petition, till the decision is taken by the Deputy
Commissioner, Dhanbad, on the representation at
Annexure 4 to the memo of present petition.
8. With the aforesaid directions/observations, this writ
petition is disposed of.
(D.N. Patel, J)
A.K.Verma/