GURUNANAK PUBLIC SCHOOL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR. A.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that petitioner got possession of the property in question in execution of the decree up to High Court and the judgement debtor has not moved the Supreme Court and therefore the decree has become final. He further submitted that when the petitioner wanted to make a boundary wall for safety of its boy/girl students, some anti social elements are creating trouble and therefore the local authorities be directed to see that no interference/obstruction is made by any person. He also submitted that petitioner is ready to deposit cost, if any, for this purpose. He submitted that a representation was made in this regard before the Superintendent of Police, Ranchi also.

(2.) MR. Saurav Arun, learned State counsel, submitted that in absence of instruction, he is not in a position to accept or controvert the statements made in the writ petition. However, he submitted that the matter can be looked into.