NAND KISHORE SAHU Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application has been filed for quashing the order dated 25-5-2010 passed by the Vice Chairman, Ranchi Regional Development Authority-respondent No. 3, whereby each of the purchasers including respondent No. 5 was asked to produce the possession letter, money receipt agreement etc. and to deposit a sum of Rs. 5,000/- for enforcing the registration of transfer by the owners of the land.

(2.) Before adverting to the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, the facts, leading to filing this case, are that the petitioners as well as the respondent No. 6 entered into a development agreement with respondent No. 4 (promoter/builder) for construction of the multi-storied building for the use as shops and offices over a piece of land bearing R.S. Plot Nos. 8, 9 & 10, Khata No. 03, Holding No. 1386, New Ward No. 3 of Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi. Thereupon, respondent No. 4 having got a map sanctioned made a construction of multi-storied building, consisting of basement + G + 7. But when certain deviation from sanctioned plan was found, the R.R.D.A. passed an order for stopping the construction. Thereafter, respondent No. 4 (builder) sought permission to complete the finishing work of the constructed area, which was accorded by the R.R.D.A. but at the same time, respondent No. 4 was directed to submit 'as built plan'. In response to that, 'as built plan' was submitted on 11-3-2003 and a sum of Rs. 81,000/- was deposited towards deviation charge. Thereupon, on verification/inquiry being made, revised plan submitted by the respondent No. 4, was sanctioned on 30-3-2010 by condoning the deviation on a condition of depositing a sum of Rs. 8,41,889/-which amount was deposited on 30/31-8-2010, but before that, the builder had sent a legal notice calling upon the land owners (petitioners) to execute the sale-deed in favour of the purchasers to whom the builder had sold the flats, to which it was replied with that the builder has not discharged his statutory duty as 'No Objection Certificate' has neither been obtained from the R.R.D.A. nor from the Ranchi Municipal Corporation nor Fire Fighting Safety Device has been installed.

(3.) It is further case of the petitioner that all of a sudden, the petitioners were served with a notice issued by the R.R.D.A. directing them to appear on 25-5-2010 and to show-cause as to why in spite of taking consideration money from the purchasers, sale-deed has not heen executed in their favour. In response to that, the petitioners appeared and filed a petition seeking time but their prayer was rejected and the impugned order was passed on 25-5-2010 itself under Section 16(4) of the Jharkhand Apartment (Property, Regulation & Ownership) Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred as the said Act), which order has been sought to be quashed.