GOPAL SHARAN BHARATIA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Against an order dtd. 12.04.2014 passed by the Municipal Corporation, Patna in Vigilance Case No. 85A of 2012, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before a Municipal Building Tribunal at Patna (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"), constituted under Sec. 329 of the Bihar Municipal Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Municipal Act') giving rise to Appeal Case No. 23 of 2014. There is statutory limit of 60 days prescribed for preferring an appeal. The petitioner had filed the appeal within the said stipulated time.

(2.) This writ application invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed on 28.02.2020, seeking issuance a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the Tribunal to dispose of the petitioner's aforesaid appeal, which has remained pending for nearly six years.

(3.) There is statement in paragraph 5 of the writ application that the appeal was fixed for hearing on 13.10.2014 but it was adjourned for the next few dates mainly for want of quorum due to the absence of either the Chairman of the Tribunal or other Members which continued for next 15 dates and in between, the case was transferred to Bench No. 2 of the Tribunal. It has further been stated that the case was heard in part on 06.07.2015 and 01.10.2015 and adjourned for further hearing. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned on 26 occasions due to absence of either the Chairman or one of the Members of the Tribunal, which continued for nearly two years from the last date of hearing. The matter was reheard on 13.04.2017, 05.05.2017 and subsequently it was heard on seven subsequent dates whereupon the detailed arguments concluded on 13.07.2017 and finally the case was fixed for order son 10.08.2017. It has further been stated that though the Tribunal fixed dates for orders, for want of quorum or on account of absence of the counsel for the Patna Municipal Corporation, few more adjournments were granted. It is alleged that the Tribunal had again insisted on hearing on 11.10.2018 whereafter initially, a date was fixed for further hearing, which took place on few more occasions till the last date on 17.01.2020. The matter was subsequently adjourned till 06.03.2020.