Dhananjay Singh v. The State of Jharkhand

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner For the Resp. Nos. 1 to 3 : Mrs. Vandana Singh, Sr.S.C.-III : Mr. Lalit Yadav, Advocate For the Resp. No. 4 Order No. 02 Mr. Ashwini Bhushan, A.C. to Sr.S.C.-III : Mr. Rahul Kumar Gupta, Advocate Dated: 10.07.2023 The present writ petition has been filed for staying the operation/implementation of order as contained in memo no. 390 dated 22.06.2023 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer-Cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Deoghar (the respondent no. 3) whereby pursuant to his order dated

08.06.2023 passed in Jharkhand Building Act Case No. 21 of 2021, the Block Agriculture Officer, Sonaraithari has been deputed as magistrate and the Superintendent of Police, Deoghar has been requested to depute police force for getting the petitioner evicted from shop no. 08 situated at Netaji Road, Below UCO Bank, P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar measuring an area of about 150 sq.ft.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no. 4- Rajesh Kumar Sah is one of the lessors of the shop in question and the petitioner has been carrying on business in the name and style of “Om Shree Baba Baidyanath Enterprises” in the said shop. The respondent no.4 filed Jharkhand Building Act Case No. 21 of 2021 in the court of the respondent no. 3 for eviction of the petitioner from the said shop which was decided in his favour on contest vide order dated 08.06.2023. Aggrieved with the said order, the petitioner preferred appeal in the court of the respondent no. 2- the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar having acknowledgement no. RCMSON23055362. A acknowledgement with respect to filing of the said appeal has 2 been annexed as Anneuxre-2 to the present writ petition. Though the date of filing of the said appeal is not mentioned in the said acknowledgement, however, as per his instruction, the said appeal has been preferred on 01.07.2023.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the main reason for preferring the present writ petition is that despite filing of the said appeal in the court of the respondent no. 2, registration number of the same is not being provided to the petitioner and in the meantime, the respondent no. 3, vide order as contained in memo no. 390 dated 22.06.2023, has deputed magistrate and has requested the Superintendent of Police, Deoghar to depute police force for getting the petitioner evicted from the said shop on 11.07.2023. It is also submitted that since at present “Shravani Mela” is being observed in Deoghar, the respondent no. 2 may have difficulty in regularly conducting the court and under the said circumstance, the petitioner has threat of eviction from the shop in question even during the pendency of the appeal. Learned counsel for the petitioner, thus, prays to direct the respondent no. 2 to dispose of the said appeal.

4. Mr. Rahul Kumar Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the caveator/respondent no. 4, submits that the said respondent filed Jharkhand Building Act Case No. 21 of 2021 primarily for the reason that the petitioner had illegally sublet the shop in question and was also a defaulter in making regular payment of rent for the same. The respondent no. 3, vide order dated 08.06.2023, has rightly directed the petitioner to vacate the said shop. Moreover, the petitioner has not mentioned in the writ petition as to when the appeal was filed in the court of the respondent no. 2. As soon as the order as contained in memo no. 390 dated 22.06.2023 was issued by the respondent no.3 deputing magistrate as well as requesting the Superintendent of Police, Deoghar to depute police force for getting the petitioner evicted from the shop in question, he without pursuing the appeal filed in the court of the respondent no. 2, preferred the present writ 3 petition.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. In course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined the prayer to the extent of directing the respondent no. 2 to dispose of the appeal preferred by him against the order dated 08.06.2023 passed by the respondent no.3 which, according to him, is not being registered by the office of the said respondent.

7. On perusal of the record, it appears that the petitioner after filing the appeal in the court of the respondent no. 2 has immediately invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court. However, during this period, the impugned order as contained in memo no. 390 dated 22.06.2023 has been issued by the respondent no. 3 for getting the petitioner evicted from the shop in question. One more contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that since “Shravani Mela” is being observed in Deoghar during this period, the respondent no. 2 may have difficulty in regularly conducting the court so as to at least entertain the petitioner’s application seeking interim relief against the order passed by the respondent no. 3.

8. Considering the said aspect of the matter, the respondent no. 2 is directed to verify regarding pendency of appeal claimed to have been filed by the petitioner in his court against the order dated 08.06.2023 passed by the respondent no. 3. If it is found that the petitioner has preferred appeal along with an application seeking interim relief, the respondent no. 2 shall take up the same on 20.07.2023 and shall at least pass an appropriate order on the said application after providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the respondent no. 4. The impugned order as contained in memo no. 390 dated 22.06.2023 issued by the respondent no. 3 shall be kept in abeyance till the petitioner’s appeal along with an application seeking interim relief is taken up by the respondent no. 2.

9. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Ritesh/ (Rajesh Shankar, J.)