Disposed

Chandra Shekhar Prasad Sinha And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand Through Deputy Commissioner And Ors.

Jharkhand HC11 Jul 2018WPC/967/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a writ petition seeking directions to authorities for installing a sewerage outlet in their building. The Court held it could not determine factual disputes regarding neighborhood obstruction but directed the authority to reconsider the matter within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach respondent no. 2 with detailed representation; respondent to decide within twelve weeks.

Chandra Shekhar Prasad Sinha And Anr. Vs The State Of… — Landlord and Tenant | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(C) No. 967 of 2017

¶4

Chandra Shekhar Prasad Sinha

¶5

Manjul Prasad

¶6

… … Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Jharkhand through Deputy Commissioner, Palamau 2. The Executive Officer, Daltonganj Municipality, Daltonganj (Medininagar), Palamau

¶9

The Chairman, Daltonganj (Medininagar) Municipality, Palamau ... … Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶11

For the Petitioners : Mr. Arbind Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Jitesh Kumar, Advocate For Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 : Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Advocate Mr. Rohan Kashyap, Advocate

¶12

-----

¶13

Order No. 06 Dated: 11.07.2018

¶14

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to extend cooperation to the petitioners for putting the sewerage waste outlet in the Southern corner of their building situated at Holding Nos. 621/1463 having an area of 0.09 acre under Daltonganj (Medininagar) Municipal Corporation.

¶15

2. The limited grievance of the petitioners raised through the present writ petition is that earlier there was a residential house on the plot in question. However, subsequently a new commercial complex was constructed by the petitioners and as per the present requirement, there is a need of proper sewerage outlet through the Southern corner of the said building. Though there is a Dharmshala in the Southern side of the said building, yet the petitioners do not intend to put the sewerage outlet by putting any inconvenience to the said Dharmshala. 3. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 stating inter alia that the petitioners have not disclosed the names of the owners of the buildings in the neighbourhood, whose walls are obstructing the flow of sewerage waste. Moreover, the building in question is in a prime location of the city which is closely surrounded by other buildings. The petitioners had also approached the Chairman/Executive Officer of Medininagar

¶16

¶17

Municipal Corporation with the said grievance, however, the matter could not be sorted out as walls have been constructed by neighbours obstructing the flow of the sewerage. The petitioners should have been prompt enough to restrain the owners of the nearby buildings from raising walls at proper stage by seeking appropriate order from the civil court of competent jurisdiction.

¶18

4. Be that as it may. This Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot determine the factual disputes involved in the matter. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the respondent no. 2 afresh by filing a representation setting out his grievance in detail. On receipt of such representation, the respondent no. 2 shall take appropriate decision in accordance with law, preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of filing of the representation.

¶19

5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction.

¶20

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶21

Manish

Chandra Shekhar Prasad Sinha And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand Through Deputy Commissioner And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Shekhar Prasad Sinha And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand Through Deputy Commissioner And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akhileshwar Singh Vs Rural Dev Dept

Syed Mohammad Qaisar Hassan And Anr. Vs Urban Development Department

Abul Kalam Alias Abul Kalam Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sunil Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Pr Secretary Department of Health

Satyendra Kumar Construction Pvt. Ltd. through Its Director Deepak Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary Building Construction Department

Chas Anchal Matasyajivi Sahyog Samiti Limited Reprr Thr Its Mantri Jaydeo Dhibar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Director Fisheries Department