The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 3259 of 2022 Mithilesh Kumar, aged 36 years, son of Shri Isho Singh, presently residing at Quarter No. H.I.G. 30, Sarley Housing Colony, Dipugarha, Hazaribagh, Post Sadar, Police Station Korra, District Hazaribagh Petitioner … … Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, officiating from Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Post Dhurwa, Police Station Dhurwa, District Ranchi 3. The Managing Director, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi officiating from Harmu, Post Harmu, Police Station Harmu, District Ranchi 4. The Competent Authority, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi officiating from Harmu, Post Harmu, Police Station Harmu, District Ranchi 5. The Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Hazaribagh Division, officiating from Hazaribagh, Post Hazaribagh, Police Station Hazaribagh, District Hazaribagh … … Respondents With W.P. (C) No. 3229 of 2022 Ram Badan Singh, aged 71 years, son of Late Ram Bilas Singh, presently residing at Quarter No. H.I.G. 41, Sarley Housing Colony, Dipugarha, Hazaribagh, Post Sadar, Police Station Korra, District Hazaribagh Petitioner … … Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, officiating from Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Post Dhurwa, Police Station Dhurwa, District Ranchi 3. The Managing Director, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi officiating from Harmu, Post Harmu, Police Station Harmu, District Ranchi 4. The Competent Authority, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi officiating from Harmu, Post Harmu, Police Station Harmu, District Ranchi 5. The Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Hazaribagh Division, officiating from Hazaribagh, Post Hazaribagh, Police Station … Respondents Hazaribagh, District Hazaribagh With W.P. (C) No. 3287 of 2022 …
Legal Reasoning
Vibha Singh, aged 44 years, wife of Sri Anil Kumar Singh, presently residing at Quarter No. H.I.G. 32, Sarley Housing Colony, Dipugarha, Hazaribagh, Post Sadar, Police Station Korra, District Hazaribagh Versus … … Petitioner 2 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, officiating from Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Post Dhurwa, Police Station Dhurwa, District Ranchi 3. The Managing Director, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi officiating from Harmu, Post Harmu, Police Station Harmu, District Ranchi 4. The Competent Authority, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi officiating from Harmu, Post Harmu, Police Station Harmu, District Ranchi 5. The Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Hazaribagh Division, officiating from Hazaribagh, Post Hazaribagh, Police Station … Respondents Hazaribagh, District Hazaribagh With W.P. (C) No. 3308 of 2022 … Suvendu Jaipuriar, aged 59 years, son of Girija Shankar Prasad, presently residing at Quarter No. H.I.G. 36, Sarley Housing Colony, Dipugarha, Hazaribagh, Post Sadar, Police Station Korra, District Hazaribagh Petitioner … … Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, officiating from Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Post Dhurwa, Police Station Dhurwa, District Ranchi 3. The Managing Director, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi officiating from Harmu, Post Harmu, Police Station Harmu, District Ranchi 4. The Competent Authority, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi officiating from Harmu, Post Harmu, Police Station Harmu, District Ranchi 5. The Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Hazaribagh Division, officiating from Hazaribagh, Post Hazaribagh, Police Station Hazaribagh, District Hazaribagh … … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner For the Respondents --- : Mrs. Ritu Kumar, Advocate : Ms. Surabhi, A.C. to Mr. Sachin Kumar, AAG-II --- 11/18.07.2023 Learned counsel for the parties are present. 2. W.P. (C) No. 3259 of 2022 has been filed for the following reliefs: - “For issuance of direction for quashing the order dated 31.05.2022 communicated by letter contained in memo No. 974 dated 29.06.2022 (Annexure-17) passed in Eviction Case No. 26 of 2022 directing the petitioner to vacate the House No. H/30 and the vacant land adjacent 3 to it within 15 days and to further clear the outstanding dues pay Rs. 1,79,488/- towards the fine otherwise it will be forcibly vacated. And for a further direction to direct the respondents to consider for regularization of the possession of the petitioner of the Quarter No. H.I.G. 30, Sarley Housing Colony, Dipugarha, Hazaribagh in pursuance to the Notification contained in Memo No. 1817 dated 17.03.2017 (Annexure-8) and till the decision is taken in pursuance to the Notification contained in Memo No. 1817 dated 17.03.2017 (Annexure-8) the possession of the petitioner of the Quarter No. H.I.G. 30, Sarley Housing Colony, Dipugarha, Hazaribagh be not disturbed. And for any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner may be found entitled to.” 3. W.P. (C) No. 3229 of 2022 has been filed for the following reliefs: - “For issuance of direction for quashing the order dated 31.05.2022 communicated by letter contained in memo No. 979 dated 28.06.2022 (Annexure-14) passed in Eviction Case No. 21 of 2022 directing the petitioner to vacate the House No. H/41 and the vacant land adjacent to it within 15 days and to further clear the outstanding dues pay Rs. 1,79,488/- towards the fine otherwise it will be forcibly vacated. And for a further direction to direct the respondents to consider for regularization of the possession of the petitioner of the Quarter No. H.I.G. 41, Sarley Housing Colony, Dipugarha, Hazaribagh in pursuance to the Notification contained in Memo No. 1817 dated 17.03.2017 (Annexure-10) and till the decision is taken in pursuance to the Notification contained in Memo No. 1817 dated 17.03.2017 (Annexure-10) the possession of the petitioner of the Quarter No. H.I.G. 41, Sarley Housing Colony, Dipugarha, Hazaribagh be not disturbed. And for any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner may be found entitled to.” 4. W.P. (C) No. 3287 of 2022 has been filed for the following reliefs: - “For issuance of direction for quashing the order dated 31.05.2022 communicated by letter contained in memo No. 980 dated 29.06.2022 (Annexure-10) passed in Eviction Case No. 25 of 2022 directing the petitioner to vacate the House No. H/32 and the vacant land adjacent to it within 15 days and to further clear the outstanding dues pay Rs. 1,79,699/- towards the fine otherwise it will be forcibly vacated. And for a further direction to direct the respondents to consider for regularization of the possession of the petitioner of the Quarter No. H.I.G. 32, Sarley Housing Colony, Dipugarha, Hazaribagh in pursuance to the Notification contained in Memo No. 1817 dated 17.03.2017 (Annexure-6) and till the decision is taken in pursuance to the Notification contained in Memo No. 1817 dated 17.03.2017 (Annexure-6) the possession of the petitioner of the Quarter No. H.I.G. 32, Sarley Housing Colony, Dipugarha, Hazaribagh be not disturbed. And for any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner may be found entitled to.” 5. W.P. (C) No. 3308 of 2022 has been filed for the following reliefs: - “For issuance of direction for quashing the order dated 31.05.2022 communicated by letter contained in memo No. 980 dated 29.06.2022 (Annexure-9) passed in Eviction Case No. 23 of 2022 directing the petitioner to vacate the House No. H/36 and the vacant land adjacent 4 to it within 15 days and to further clear the outstanding dues pay Rs. 1,75,407/- towards the fine otherwise it will be forcibly vacated. And for a further direction to direct the respondents to consider for regularization of the possession of the petitioner of the Quarter No. H.I.G. 36, Sarley Housing Colony, Dipugarha, Hazaribagh in pursuance to the Notification contained in Memo No. 1817 dated 17.03.2017 (Annexure-4) and till the decision is taken in pursuance to the Notification contained in Memo No. 1817 dated 17.03.2017 (Annexure-4) the possession of the petitioner of the Quarter No. H.I.G. 36, Sarley Housing Colony, Dipugarha, Hazaribagh be not disturbed. And for any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner may be found entitled to.” 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all the writ petitions are of similar nature and therefore they have been tagged. She has advanced her arguments in W.P. (C) No. 3259 of 2022 and submits that the same arguments be adopted in all the cases. W.P. (C) No. 3259 of 2022 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner along with others had moved earlier before this Court in writ petition being W.P. (C) No. 2989 of 2014 challenging the orders passed by the Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Hazaribagh directing the petitioner along with others to immediately vacate the houses allotted to them. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner was put in possession over the property in terms of letter dated 22.07.2009 as contained in Annexure-2. She submits that the said writ petition was dismissed on the ground that the allotment was made by one Arjun Prasad who had no power to make allotment. 8. She has submitted that the entitlement of the petitioner for regularization of the property in his name by virtue of notification dated 17.03.2017 was not under consideration in the earlier round of litigation and therefore the present writ petition has been filed. She has referred to the circular No. 1817 dated 17.03.2017 and submits that by the impugned order the plea pursuant to the circular has also been rejected without granting any opportunity of hearing. 9. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent- Housing Board has submitted that ex-facie the petitioner does not satisfy the condition laid down in the circular dated 17.03.2017 which refers to illegal possession for more than 10 years and as per the case of the petitioner, the petitioner was put in possession only on 5 22.07.2009. She has further submitted that as per the said circular, the application for regularization was required be filed within a period of six months and even this clause was not complied. She submits that as per the said circular, the policy was one time policy. She also submits that the said circular/policy is not under challenge before this Court and the petitioner is not covered by the said circular/policy. 10. This Court finds that it is not in dispute that one Arjun Prasad, who had allocated the property of housing board to the petitioner, had no jurisdiction to allot the property and this aspect of the matter has already been considered and decided against the petitioner in the earlier round of litigation. 11. Now the petitioner is seeking the benefit of the circular/policy contained in memo No. 1817 dated 17.03.2017 which deals with regularization of property in unauthorised occupation of the various persons. So far as the circular dated 17.03.2017 is concerned, the same is a policy decision and apparently by way of one-time measure. The application for regularization in terms of the policy was to be filed strictly within a period of six months and the pre-condition was that the person should be in illegal possession of the property for 10 years. The petitioner does not satisfy the aforesaid two conditions. As per the case of the petitioner, he remained in possession of the property only from 22.07.2009 and admittedly the petitioner did not submit the application for regularization within the time stipulated in the circular. Accordingly, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in terms of the aforesaid circular dated 17.03.2017. 12. In the aforesaid circumstances, the impugned order/action does not call for any interference in writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, W.P. (C) No. 3259 of 2022 is hereby dismissed. 13. Pending I.A., if any, is closed. W.P. (C) No. 3229 of 2022; W.P. (C) No. 3287 of 2022 and W.P. (C) No. 3308 of 2022 14. So far as the aforesaid three cases are concerned, it is not in dispute that they are similarly placed as that of W.P. (C) No. 3259 of 2022. 6 15. The case numbers with respect to the earlier round of writ petition and the date of possession of the property in each case are as under: - W.P. (C) No. 3229 of 2022 Earlier moved Date of possession of property W.P. (C) No. 4925 of 2011 Vide letter dated 18.06.2009 W.P. (C) No. 3287 of 2022 Earlier moved Date of possession of property W.P. (C) No. 4136 of 2011 Vide letter dated 22.07.2009 W.P. (C) No. 3308 of 2022 Earlier moved Date of possession of property W.P. (C) No. 4258 of 2011 Vide letter dated 22.06.2009 16. In the aforesaid three cases also, the concerned petitioner did not move the respondent authority within the stipulated period of 6 months from the date of the circular dated 17.03.2017. Further, the petitioner in each case does not satisfy the condition for availing the benefits of circular dated 17.03.2017 as the concerned petitioner is not in possession of the property for more than 10 years as on 17.03.2017. These three cases are squarely covered by the aforesaid judgement passed in W.P. (C) No. 3259 of 2022 and are accordingly dismissed in terms of the judgement passed in W.P. (C) No. 3259 of 2022. 17. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is closed. Binit /Mukul (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)