The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a notice for demolition. The Court held that since similar notices were already under appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, no reason existed to entertain the present petition separately.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 97 of 2022
Gopal Choudhary
… … Petitioner
Versus
…. … Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shray Mishra, A.C. to G.A.-III For the Resp.-RMC : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate -----
Order No. 02
Dated: 17.01.2022
The present case is taken up through video conferencing.
2. At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects, as pointed out by the office, are ignored.
3. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the notice as contained in letter no. 832 dated 22.12.2021 (Annexure-16 to the writ petition) issued by the Town Planner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation (RMC), Ranchi (the respondent no. 4) whereby the petitioner has been directed to demolish his structure constructed in ‘Road Widening Area’ gifted to the Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi, and to inform the RMC, Ranchi within a week from the date of issuance of the said notice, failing which the said structure will be demolished by the RMC, Ranchi in terms with the provisions of Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 and the expenses incurred in demolition shall be realized from the petitioner. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondents not to take any coercive step against the petitioner regarding demolition of the structure standing over his land till disposal of Misc. Appeal No. 40 of 2021 which is pending before the Appellate Tribunal, Ranchi Regional Development Authority (R.R.D.A.), Ranchi. Petitioner has further prayed for staying the operation of impugned notice dated 22.12.2021 issued by the respondent no. 4 during pendency of the present writ petition.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2
5. It appears that two similar notices as contained in letter no. 767 dated 23.09.2021 (Annexured-11 to the writ petition) and letter no. 807 dated 03.12.2021 (Annexured-12 to the writ petition) earlier issued by the respondent no. 4 have already been challenged by the petitioner before the Appellate Tribunal, R.R.D.A., Ranchi by preferring Misc. Appeal No. 40 of 2021 which is pending adjudication.
6. Since the impugned notice as contained in letter no. 832 dated 22.12.2021 has been issued by the respondent no. 4 during pendency of the said appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, R.R.D.A., Ranchi, I do not see any reason to entertain the present writ petition in which the said notice has separately been challenged. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
7. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to challenge the impugned notice as contained in letter no. 832 dated 22.12.2021 issued by the respondent no. 4 in the pending appeal i.e. Misc. Appeal No. 40 of 2021 before the said Appellate Tribunal and is also at liberty to pray for interim relief on which the said Appellate Tribunal shall pass appropriate order after providing due opportunity of hearing to the parties.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Ritesh
Gopal Choudhary
The State of Jharkhand
The Municipal Commissioner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi
Jharkhand Building Appellate Tribunal, Ranchi
The Town Planner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi
Akhilesh Kumar Choudhary
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court