Single Judge disposed of a writ petition by directing the Deputy Commissioner to dispose expeditiously of a pending appeal by the petitioner against a memo dated 07.02.2020, and restrain coercive steps pending that decision.
Directed respondent No.2 to dispose of pending appeal within six weeks; no coercive steps against petitioner till final decision.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 822 of 2020
Sushant Gaur ….. Petitioner
Versus
….. Respondents
CORAM
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
For the Petitioner: Mr. Tapas Kabiraj For the State: Mr. R. K. Gupta, Sr. S.C-I
02/03.06.2020 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the notices dated 14.09.2019 & 15.10.2019 (Annexures- 2 & 4 respectively to the writ petition) issued by the respondent No.4 in B.P.L.E Case No. 03/2019-20 whereby the petitioner has been directed to remove encroachment from the land appertaining to Khata No. 202, Plot No. 568, measuring an area of 400 sq. ft. & 1.72 Decimals, Mouza-Deoghar, Thana No. 1147, P.S-MGM, Mango, District-East Singbhuum. Further prayer has been made for quashing the order as contained in memo No. 156 dated 07.02.2020 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent No.4 in connection with the aforesaid case requesting the respondent No.3 to depute a Magistrate to remove the alleged encroachment from the aforesaid land.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already preferred an appeal on 13.02.2020 in the Court of the respondent No.2 against the order as contained in memo No. 156 dated 07.02.2020 passed by the respondent No.4 in B.P.L.E Case No. 03/2019-20. A copy of the memo of appeal has been annexed as Annexure-6 to the present writ petition. The limited submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that despite preferring an appeal before the respondent No.2, the same has not yet been disposed of. In the meantime, the respondent No.4 is taking steps for removal of the alleged encroachment from the land in question. Hence, the respondent No.2 may be directed to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner expeditiously.
Learned A.C to Sr. S.C-I appearing on behalf of the State of Jharkhand submits that if the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the respondent No.2, the appellate authority shall make all possible endeavours to dispose of the same without any undue delay.
Considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the submission of learned A.C to Sr. S.C-I, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.2 to take up the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order as contained in memo No. 156 dated 07.02.2020 passed by the respondent No.4 in B.P.L.E Case No. 03/2019-20 and to dispose of the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
Till the respondent No.2 takes a final decision in the pending appeal, no coercive step shall be taken against the petitioner for removal of the alleged encroachment from the land in question.
(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)
Satish/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ court should direct the appellate authority to dispose of a pending appeal expeditiously to prevent coercive steps pending its decision.
Sushant Gaur
The State of Jharkhand
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
