SHYAM BABU RAI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General No. 11 for the State.

(2.) THE petitioner seeks quashing of the letter no. 1011(M) dated 7.2.2008 issued by the Competent Authority, Department of Building Construction Bihar, Patna by which the petitioner has been directed to vacate the premises situated in Plot No. 392 at Mohallah Eastern Gate of Patna High Court, P.S. Kotwali, District -Patna and further for a direction restraining the respondent authorities from ejecting or evacuating him from the said premises or dismantling the building and for other consequential reliefs. Various contentions have been made by learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his aforesaid stand but the crucial issue in the present matter ultimately boils down to the fact as to whether the action in the present matter has been taken by the authorities who had no jurisdiction to act in the matter. In this regard reference has been made by learned counsel for the petitioner to the S.O. No. 565 dated 26.6.1971 issued under the provision of Section 2(b) of the Bihar Government Premises (Allotment, Rent, Recovery and Eviction) Act, 1956 by which it has been laid down that for the New Capital Area, Patna as specified in the Schedule in respect of residences meant for Ministers, Deputy Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries Presiding Officers of the Bihar Legislature, Legislators, Officers and Staff of the Secretariat and attached offices and such other residences as the State Government may, from time to time, decide the Under Secretary or Assistant Secretary to Government of Bihar in the Public Works Department has been designated as the Competent Authority. In the present matter the premises in question are admittedly not a residence made for any of the categories of Ministers, Officers and Staff, etc. and as a matter of fact it is not even a residence in the Government record. In the said circumstances, it was not open to the Under Secretary, the so -called Competent Authority, under the notification dated 26.6.1971 to have taken any action in the matter and since the original order itself has been passed by an officer not having any jurisdiction, the appeal against the same will not be of any effect. In fact one of the contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he had never filed any appeal before the appellate authority and to that extent the said order has been passed suo motu which is not permissible to the authorities.

(3.) LEARNED Additional Advocate General No. 11 has brought to the notice of this Court two notifications of the Government of Bihar dated 27.8.2008 and 29.8.2008 in which the previous notification dated 26.6.1971 has been superseded and the areas and extent of powers of the Competent Authority under the Act has been widened to include any Government premises as defined in Section 2(c) read with Section 2(d) of the Act and with respect to the New Capital Area, the Under Secretary to the Government of Bihar in the Building Construction Department has been declared as the Competent Authority and by the latter notification Sri Chandreshwar Prasad. Under Secretary to the Government in the Building Construction Department, has been authorized to perform the functions of the Competent Authority.