DHANBAD MOTOR COMPANY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 6.6.1995 passed by the respondent No. 3 vide Letter No. Patna 15 dated 6.6.1995 and for issuance of an appropriate writ order or direction to the respondent to allot to the petitioners the shop of an area of 856 sq. feet in front portion of the Jawan Bhawan on lease of 30 years as promised by them on 10.10.1981 at a meeting held between the petitioners and other shop keepers and confirmed by the Director himself by his letter dated 5.6.1991.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case is that the respondents i.e. respondent No. 2, the Sainik Kalyan Nideshalaya also known as the Sainik Punawas Nideshalaya governed by the Home Department, Government of Bihar Equivalent through its Director, is the owner of the land measuring 4.6 acres situated by the side of the main road, Ranchi. Within a portion of the said land, the respondents constructed shop complex known as commercial complex shop rooms. The shop; rooms measuring 40 ft. x 20 ft. each located within the ground floor of the building was leased out to the tenants, including the petitioners on payment of rent for a period of five years initially in September, 1969. The period of lease was renewed from time to time. A circular was issued to the lessees by the Home Department Government of Bihar, through the Director, Sainik Kalyan Nideshalaya, informing the lessees that Vijay Rawat who was the Estate Manager of the complex has ceased to function and in his place Maj. Ramayan Singh was appointed as the Estate Manager from 1.5.1988 and that Maj.

(3.) IT is further stated by the respondents that by order dated 13.3.1995 (Annexure 1) passed by this Court in CWJC No. 3352 of 1994 R, direction was given to the petitioners to file their representation before the Director, Sainik Kalyan Nideshalaya, Home Department Government of Bihar, who was directed to examine the claim of the petitioners in respect of their representation for being given new accommodation by constructing a new building by the side of the original Indian Airlines Office and to decide the matter in accordance with law within two weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. After receiving the representation, the director had given full opportunity to the petitioners to submit all documents and other facts and in response, the petitioners had produce and relied upon the letter (Annexure 5) issued by the then Deputy Development Commissioner, Ranchi besides other documents including some correspondences. After considering the pleas of the petitioners, the Director had disposed of the representation of the petitioners by a comprehensive speaking order dated 6.6.1995 (impugned order). The respondents further state that the letter dated 12.5.1988 referred to by the petitioners notifying the name of Maj. Ramayan Singh as the Estate Manager was only in the context of payment and realization of rent from the tenants and in terms of which the Estate Manager was authorized to deal with the tenants. The letter cannot be construed to give any authority to the Estate Manager to make fresh allotment or to make promise or assurance on behalf of the Sainik Kalyan Nideshalaya or to lay down or stipulate any terms and conditions with any out side party.