Disposed

Hote Le Lac through Its General Manager Sri Satya Prakash v. State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Jharkhand HC17 Aug 2016WPC/6064/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition regarding the Non-Objection Certificate. Instead of direct intervention, the Court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation with facts and the prior judgment for consideration within 8 weeks by the Assistant Fire Extinguisher Officer.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to submit fresh representation with facts and documents for N.O.C consideration within 8 weeks; Pending I.A. closed.

Hote Le Lac through Its General Manager Sri Satya… — Service and Employment | Jharkhand HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 6064 of 2014

¶3

Hotel Le Lac, Line Tank Road, Ranchi

¶4

through its General Manager Sri Satya Prakash R/o Morabadi, Bariatu, Ranchi

¶5

…......... Petitioner

¶6

Vrs.

¶7

State of Jharkhand

¶8

Director General, Fire Extinguisher Dept., Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶9

Divisional Fire Extinguisher Officer, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi 4. Assistant Fire Extinguisher Officer, Ranchi

¶10

..... Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner : M/s Ramit Satender, Rajiv R. Chakravorty For the Respondents : Mr. Manoj Kumar No.3, S.C. Mines

¶12

05/17.08.2016 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶13

Petitioner have approached this Court being aggrieved by the letter dated 5.3.2013 (Annexure-15) issued by the Assistant Divisional Fire Extinguisher Officer, Ranchi, Respondent no.4 where under it was communicated that any action regarding issuance of 'No Objection Certificate' relating to fire license would be taken only after the delivery of judgment in the CBI Case pending against the petitioner.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the C.B.I case against the petitioner being R.C. Case No. 03(A)/2011-R under Section 120B read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as well as Section 52/55 of the Jharkhand Regional Development Authority Act, 2001 was the subject matter of W.P.(Cr.) No. 319 of 2011 preferred by the Company which is running the management of the Hotel as well as its Director. The order taking cognizance dated 25.10.2011 passed by the Special Judge, C.B.I, Ranchi in the aforesaid case has been quashed by the learned Single Judge of this Court vide judgment dated 27.11.2015 holding that if the petitioners are allowed to be prosecuted it would be a miscarriage of justice. The criminal writ petition was accordingly allowed. (Annexure-22 to the supplementary affidavit filed on

¶15

-2-

¶16

23.4.2016). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner have again preferred a fresh representation before the respondent authorities of the Fire Department for issuance of N.O.C in relation to the fire safety license but till date the same has not been issued.

¶17

Learned counsel for the respondent- State submit that in view of the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(Cr.) No. 319 of 2011 (Annexure-22) in the case of petitioner now petitioner may be directed to approach the competent authority under the respondent Fire Extinguisher Department, Government of Jharkhand for redressal of their grievance which may be considered in accordance with law after due scrutiny of the relevant facts

¶18

Having regard to the subsequent development brought on record and taken note herein above, the writ petition is being disposed of to enable the petitioner to pursue their representation before the competent authority / respondent no.4, Assistant Fire Extinguisher Officer, Ranchi for issuance of N.O.C duly supported with all necessary facts and documents and the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. On such representation being made by the petitioner, due consideration be accorded in accordance with law after scrutiny of the relevant facts and documents by the competent authority / respondent no.4 within reasonable time preferably 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 6. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Pending I.A. is also closed.

¶19

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)

¶20

A. Mohanty

Hote Le Lac through Its General Manager Sri Satya Prakash v. State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hote Le Lac through Its General Manager Sri Satya Prakash v. State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarla Sharma Vs Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director And Ors.

Shankar Bhagwan Mishra Vs Mines And Geological Survey

Bhuneshwar Singh and Anr. Vs the State of Jharkhand and Others

Rewat Choudhary and Ors. Vs Collectariate

Haldhar Gorai Vs Welfare

Sunil Singh and Ors. Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.