THAKUR CHANDRABHUSHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner No. 1 is the Secretary of Deep Co -operative Housing Construction Committee. The Khasmahal land pertaining to Plot No. 605 was allotted to the said Committee for the purpose of construction of houses. The applications were made for sanction of the building plan. The plan was approved, so far as ground floor is concerned. The application for sanction of plan for further construction was made by the petitioners as far back as in the year 1989, which is still pending even after lapse of about 19 years.

(2.) THE Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Dhalbhum, Jamshedpur by his Letter No. 3365 dated 21st December, 2006 issued notice to the petitioners asking them to appear before him on 8th January. 2007 with relevant documents. In the said letter, it was mentioned, that faling appearance, appropriate action under the provisions of Khasmahal shall be taken against them. The petitioners appeared on 8th January, 2007 and submitted their reply, claiming that they are the lease holders of the land and in the lease agreement, there was no provision for any such enquiry.

(3.) THE respondents have contested the writ petition. A counter affidavit has also been filed, stating, inter alia, that the impugned letters dated 21st December, 2006 and 8th January, 2007 are justified and in terms of the agreement between the parties in the lease agreement, the conditions were led allowing construction in accordance with the sanctioned plan, but the petitioners were proceeding with the construction work without any due sanction or approval of the plan. The said act is illegal and as such, the petitioners were issued notice to show cause and were directed to produce the documents. They were also directed to stop the construction work by letter dated 21st December, 2006 (Annexure 5), but inspite of the same, they did not stop the construction work. In that circumstance, the impugned order dated 8th January, 2007 (Annexure 7) was issued, directing the police to ensure immediate stoppage of construction work. There is, thus, no illegality or arbitrariness in the impugned order.