IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
-----------
W.P(PIL) No. 803 of 2005
——
Dhananjay Kumar Dubey ...... Petitioner
-- Versus--
The State of Jharkhand & Others ...... Respondents
-------------
CORAM : HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY
----------
For the Petitioner : -----------
For the Respondents : Md.Mokhtar Khan, ASGI(Union of India)
Mr.A.K.Pandey (JSEB)
Mr.R.R.Mishra (State of Jharkhand)
-------------
Order No.73 Dated 11th July, 2011
This Public Interest Litigation started in the year 2005
and that too in relation to the construction of a National Highway,
which is a duly approved and sanctioned scheme, obviously by the
the Union of India itself. Since 2005, several orders have been
passed by this Court taking some strong views against the slow
working in the matter and several orders are running in several
pages and as back as on 06.04.2009, after taking note of the
earlier orders, this Court directed the Secretary, Road Construction
Department, Government of Jharkhand; Engineer-in-Chief,
National Highway Division, Government of Jharkhand; Officer
responsible for liaison work in this project; Ministry of Surface and
Road Transport, Government of India, New Delhi and the Deputy
Chief Engineer, South Eastern Railways, Ranchi to appear in
person on 28.04.2009 at 10.30 a.m. and swear affidavit within two
weeks stating the progress made in the construction of fly-over and
the stipulated time, in which, the construction of fly-over along with
the connecting roads shall be completed.
2. Thereafter, again on 28.4.2009 facts were considered
in detail and the Division Bench of this Court observed that it is a
gross act of negligence on the part of the authorities of the
respondents and this Court observed that we have no objection but
to request His Excellency the Governor of Jharkhand to nominate
one of the officers who shall look into the matter and submit the
report on or before 15.5.2009 as to who are the officers and the
departments responsible for not completing the construction of fly-
over in time. Not only this, the extra ordinary step was taken by the
Division Bench of this Court by requesting His Excellency the
Governor of Jharkhand to issue appropriate direction in this matter.
However, this order was modified and the Chief Secretary of
Government of Jharkhand was directed to look into the matter and
submit the report. However, again it was reiterated that the request
made to His Excellency the Governor of Jharkhand to issue
appropriate direction in the matter so that persons who are in the
realm of the whole affairs could be serious in the matter.
3. We have narrated the facts stated in the above two
orders only and it is suffice to state that again and again detailed
facts were mentioned in the orders and ultimately this Court
proposed to initiate the contempt proceeding against the officers.
However, that initiation of proceeding was stayed by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India vide its order dated 8.4.2011 and the
learned counsel for the State and the Union of India both submitted
before this Court on 6.6.2011 that this Court may watch and
supervise the progress of the construction of the national highway.
4. On 6.6.2011, it was brought to the notice of this Court
that the Ministry of Defence has agreed that they will handover the
vacant land measuring 1.32 Acres only, which is needed for
completion of the national highway. However, for this land of only
1.32 Acres, the State Government was required to give adequate
valued land to the Union of the India. Here, we may observe that
once the Ministry of Defence and the Union of India agreed to hand
over those land measuring 1.32 Acres to the State Government,
they have no right to retain the possession of the land to delay the
project of public importance on any pretext including the pretext
that the Defence Ministry / Union of India is required to be given the
land of equal measurement/ valuation by the State Government.
The Defence Ministry /Union of India cannot keep this land now to
have bargaining position over the public importance project and
behave like the private land dealer and that too resulting into
halting of the construction of the national highway of public
importance of the project of non else than the Central Government
itself.
5. The learned counsel for the Union of India submitted
that he has received a communication from the Union of India
through the officer of the Union of India that some formalities are
required to be completed.
6. We have perused the said communication and in this
communication it has been stated that -“The case is being
processed expeditiously and not in routine manner wherein a
military courier is carrying the documents for obtaining
recommendation of intermediate Head Quarters”.
7. It appears that still the Defence Ministry is under the
impression that expeditious working is sending correspondence
through the Special Military Courier, ignoring the fact that what is
the stage and progress in the work, is the determining factor for
finding out whether it is expeditious or not.
8. In the case of handing over of possession of 1.32
Acres of land, the Defence Ministry should have come forward
forthwith and they should have handed-over the land to the State
Government without waiting for them getting the land. This Court
will not allow the handing over of this land of 1.32 Acres referred in
the order dated 6.6.2011 to be stopped by the Union of India till the
Union of India gets alternate land from the State. Therefore, this
Court is directing the Ministiry of Defence as well as the Union of
India to handover the land measuring 1.32 Acres by or before 17th
August, 2011, irrespective of the fact that whether by that the
possession of the land in lieu of 1.32 Acres of land is given by the
State Government to the Union of India or not. In case the land is
not handed over by 17th August, 2011 or before that date, the
Secretary of the Government of India, Ministry of Defence, shall
remain present in the Court on 23rd August, 2011.
9. Put up this case on 23rd August, 2011.
10. The State Government is again reminded that to
avoid any stern action, which may be taken by this Court in this
matter, they should also show their work and working on the project
and do the job expeditiously without further orders by this Court.
11. A copy of this order be handed over to the counsel
appearing for the State Government as well as the counsel
appearing for the Union of India.
(Prakash Tatia, A.C.J.)
(Jaya Roy, J.)
Biswas/SI