Allowed

Shiv Charan Prasad and Ors. v. the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Jharkhand HC5 Aug 2019WPC/2853/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge bench allowed the application to delete names of four petitioners from the cause title as the encroachment notice was issued only to petitioner No. 5. The High Court disposed of the main writ petition pending conclusion of the underlying encroachment proceedings by directing the authority to conclude the case.

What did the court decide?

Ordered deletion of names of petitioners No. 1 to 4; Writ petition disposed of with direction to conclude Encroachment Case No. 70 of 2014-15 expeditiously.

Shiv Charan Prasad and Ors. Vs the State of Jharkhand… — RTI and Transparency | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 2853 of 2015

¶3

Shiv Charan Prasad

¶4

Ashok Singh

¶5

Hari Rachan

¶6

Md. Anjar

¶7

5.Mansoor Alam .... Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Jharkhand & others … Respondents

¶10

¶11

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

¶12

--For the Petitioner : Mr. Brij N. Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.C. to S.C. II --- Order No. 07 Dated 05^th August, 2019

¶13

I.A. No. 1556 of 2016

¶14

Heard Mr. Brij N. Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.C. to S.C. II for the respondents-State.

¶15

Petitioners in this application have prayed for deletion of name of petitioners No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 in view of the fact that the notice regarding encroachment was issued in the name of petitioner No. 5.

¶16

In view of the aforesaid fact, this application stands allowed and the name of petitioners No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 are deleted from the cause title of this writ application and this writ application shall now be confined only with respect to petitioner No. 5.

¶17

Office to do the needful.

¶18

W.P.(C) No. 2853 of 2015

¶19

The prayer in this writ application is for quashing of the Notice issued in connection with Encroachment Case No. 70 of 2014-15 under the signature of the Circle Officer, Dhanbad by which the petitioner has been directed to show cause as to why the encroachment as mentioned in the notice shall not be removed.

¶20

It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner on receipt of impugned notice has already submitted a show cause reply, but he is not aware as to whether the Encroachment Case No. 70 of 2014-15 has finally been disposed of or not.

¶21

From the averment made in the writ petition it appears that the petitioner is selling ice within plot No. 266, measuring an area of 189 sq. ft. situated at Bank More, Dhanbad. The petitioner claims that he along with

¶22

¶23

others have been running their shops on the plot in question for a considerable length of time, but ultimately a notice was issued to him by the Circle Officer, Dhanbad by virtue of which he has been directed to give reply to the show cause notice as to why he had made encroachment, as mentioned in the notice and which has not been removed. The petitioner had appeared and given reply to the show cause notice.

¶24

In absence of the counter affidavit, it is not clear as to whether the encroachment proceeding has been concluded or not.

¶25

Be that as it may since the petitioner has already given reply to the show cause notice issued to him by the Circle Officer, Dhanbad (respondent No. 4), this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to conclude the Encroachment Case No. 70 of 2014-15 expeditiously if the same has not yet been concluded.

¶26

(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)

¶27

Shiv Charan Prasad and Ors. v. the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Charan Prasad and Ors. v. the 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ritesh Kumar Nishad Alias Ritesh Kr Nishad Alias Pappu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Maya Devi Vs Dilip Majhi and Ors.

Julee Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Sanjay Kumar Sah And Ors. Vs Khelu Mandal And Ors.

Abdul Wahab Vs Sri Besh Lal Prasad

Chinmoy Banerjee Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.