IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.13531 of 2010
1. BIDYOTAMA DEVI W/O LATE SHAMBHU NATH SHARMA R/O
IN FRONT OF LIG PLOT NO. 28, NOW IN FRONT OF M.I.G. PLOT
NO. S/378 AND S/377, P.O. LOHIANAGAR, P.S.KANKARBAGH,
DISTT-PATNA
Versus
1. THE BIHAR STATE HOUSING BOARD THROUGH ITS MANAGING
DIRECTOR 6 MANGLES ROAD, PATNA
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIHAR STATE HOUSING BOARD 6
MANGLES ROAD, PATNA
3. THE MANAGER ESTATE, BIHAR STATE HOUSING BOARD 6,
MANGLES ROAD, PATNA
4. SMT. SEEMA SINGH W/O SRI GOURI SHANKAR SINGH R/O
MIG PLOT NO. S/378, LOHIA NAGAR HOUSING COLONY, PATNA
5. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary , Deptt. Of
Urban Development, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
6. The Patna Municipal Corporation through the Municipal
Commissioner, Bihar, Patna (the successor Organization of PRDA)
-----------
9. 21.04.2011 No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of
the State of Bihar or the Patna Municipal Corporation.
Counsel for the Housing Board submits that
under no circumstances can the petitioner be allowed to
encroach on any area of the land acquired and handed
over to the Housing Board.
If the contention of the counsel for the Housing
Board be accepted the logical conclusion would be that the
petitioner is required to be walled up in her house with no
means of ingress and egress.
The order dated 27.1.2011 more than adequately
notices that the writ application is raising far more serious
issues with regard to Urban Planning of the town of the
Patna including laying of residential plots, pathways for
2
ingress and egress etc.
The writ petition in its present form is raising
more of an administrative issue at this stage with regard to
Urban Planning rather than legal issues. There can be no
two opinions that the petitioner cannot be allowed to
occupy any area settled with the Housing Board. But
simultaneously, the State Government or the Patna
Municipal Corporation shall have to provide a path way for
ingress and egress to the petitioner from her plot. These
were issues to be more properly considered and kept in
mind as part of larger Urban Planning at the time that the
lands were acquired for the Housing Board.
The matter is referred to the Secretary, Urban
Department whom the Court considers the most
appropriate authority at this stage of the case to deal with
issues.
The Secretary, Urban Development shall grant a
personal hearing to the petitioner/her representative, to
the Housing Board, to the Patna Municipal Corporation as
also respondent no. 4/her representative. Needless to
stated that the concern of the Court only is that the
petitioner must have an ingress and egress to her
residential plot.
Awaiting the report of the Secretary, Urban
Development, as prayed on behalf of the State of Bihar, list
3
after six months under the same heading at the same
position.
In the meantime, the interim direction contained
in the order dated 3.3.2011 with regard to the 7 feet 7
inches passage shall continue to operate.
P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)