Dismissed

Smt.Uttam Devi v. Ranchi Regional Development Au

Jharkhand HC8 Nov 2019WPC/6235/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge bench dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of an order rejecting cancellation of a building plan and issuance of directions to stop construction. The court held the petition was not maintainable, directing the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the relevant Appellate Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to prefer an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal within 30 days.

Smt.Uttam Devi Vs Ranchi Regional Development Au — Municipal and Town Planning | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 6235 of 2009

Smt. Uttam Devi

… … Petitioner

Versus

Ranchi Regional Development Authority, Ranchi through its Vice-Chairman

¶6

Smt. Meera Kishore

¶7

Kishor Kushalendra

¶8

Kamal Kishore

¶9

M/s Sun Developers, Ranchi through its Partners

¶10

The State of Jharkhand

¶11

Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi through its Chief Executive Officer … … Respondents

¶12

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶13

For the Petitioner : Mr. R.S.P. Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For Respondent Nos. 1 & 7 : Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, Advocate For Respondent No. 6 (State) : AC to GP-I For the Private Respondents : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sahay, Advocate -----

¶14

08/08.11.2019 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 07.07.2009 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent no. 1 – Vice-Chairman, Ranchi Regional Development Authority in L.S. Case No. 43/2008, whereby the petition filed by the petitioner to initiate proceeding for cancellation of the building plan of the private respondents being B.C. Case No. 1203/2006 under the provision of Section 38 of the Jharkhand Regional Development Authority Act, has been rejected. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to stop the construction work of the multistoried building named as ‘Kishore Enclave’ which, according to the petitioner, is being carried out on her raiyati (private) land.

¶15

Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 1 – RRDA as well as the respondent no. 7 – Ranchi Municipal Corporation, submits that the land in question now comes under the jurisdiction of the Ranchi Municipal Corporation and the entire record in relation to the present case has

¶16

been sent by the RRDA to the Ranchi Municipal Corporation. The learned counsel further raises objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition in view of Section 442 of the Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 and submits that the petitioner has an efficacious/statutory remedy of filing appeal before the Municipal Building Tribunal. He further submits that the power of Municipal Building Tribunal has been vested to the Appellate Tribunal, Ranchi Regional Development Authority, Ranchi in terms of notification no. 985 dated 04.03.2014 which is empowered to hear the appeals filed under Section 442 of the Act, 2011. In support of the aforesaid contention, the learned counsel produced a copy of the said notification which is taken on record.

¶17

In view of the said submission made on behalf of the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 7, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition at this stage. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned order dated 07.07.2009 before the said Appellate Tribunal. If the said appeal is preferred within 30 days from the date of the order along with the limitation petition for condonation of delay, the said Tribunal shall liberally consider the limitation petition keeping in view that the writ petition remained pending before this court for a considerable period.

¶18

The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid liberty and observation.

¶19

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶20

Manish

Smt.Uttam Devi v. Ranchi Regional Development Au

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Uttam Devi v. Ranchi Regional Development Au

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

Ashpati Kunwar And Anr. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Srikant Sharma Vs State of Jharkhand And Others

M/S.Tata Engineering And Locomot Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Nesar Ahmad And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Dr Mohan Jha Vs Education

Ram Anuj Singh Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.