Single Judge disposed of a writ petition challenging inflated dues for a Low Income Group House. The court directed the Managing Director to provide calculations and dispose of the grievance after hearing.
Directing Respondent No.4 to provide calculation sheets and Issue of Order to consider grievance after hearing.
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. 1947 of 2012
Rameshwar Maharaj, S/o- Late Ganesh Maharaj, R/o- Low Income Group (L.I.G) House No. 192(R), Adityapur, P.O. & P.S. Adityapur, Dist. Saraikella- Kharsawan. … … Petitioner
Versus
… … Respondents
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
--For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate Ms. Apoorva Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sachin Kumar, Advocate Mr. Gaurang Jajodia, Advocate
2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:
“(a) For quashing letter no. 1262 dated 25.06.2011 issued by the Estate Officer, Jharkhand State Housing Officer, Ranchi whereby and whereunder, the Respondent Authorities have very arbitrarily and illegally directed the petitioner to deposit a highly inflated amount of Rs. 3,61,642/- (Rupees Three lakh sixty one thousand six hundred and forty two only) as dues for the Low Income Group House, which has been allotted to the Petitioner by the Respondent Board at the cost of Rs. 33,300/out of which, the Petitioner had already paid Rs. 27,540/-.
(b) For quashing of letter no. 378 dated 24.02.2012 whereby the petitioner has been informed that Low Income Group House allotted to him (For which an agreement had been executed on 21.04.1990 for the consideration price of Rs. 33,300/- has been
2
very arbitrarily, illegally and unilaterally revalued adding Rs. 87,420/- (Eighty seven thousand four hundred twenty) more to the price for which the agreement has been entered/executed and possession handed over long back.
3. The matter was sent for mediation, but as per the report, the dispute could not be settled through mediation.
4. When the case is taken up today, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that if the petitioner pays the admissible amount then the grievance of the petitioner with regard to the disputed amount can be looked into by the Managing Director of the Housing Board. He submits that he has received specific instructions to make this submission before this Court.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to Annexure- 3 and has submitted that it has been recorded therein that an amount of Rs. 27,540 /- was deposited by the petitioner. He further refers to clause 8 of the hire purchase agreement (Annexure- 2) and submits that the petitioner is ready to pay in terms of clause- 8 thereof. He submits that the moment the calculation with respect to admissible dues in terms of Clause 8 of the hire purchase agreement is forwarded to the petitioner, the same will be paid within a period of two weeks and for the remaining grievance, the matter may be disposed of for consideration by the Managing Director.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid submissions advanced, this writ petition is disposed of directing the parties to follow the following schedule:-
| By 06.03.2023 | Petitioner to file representation before the |
|---|---|
| Respondent no.4 with a copy of this order and the writ records. |
|
| By 22.03.2023 | Respondent no. 4 to provide two calculation |
| Through speed post | sheet- (i) the details of the admissible amount in |
| terms of clause- 8 of the agreement (ii) details | |
| of the calculation with regards to any further |
3
| amount which is said to be disputed amount by the petitioner. |
|
|---|---|
| By 06.04.2023 | The petitioner would deposit the amount in terms of calculation sheet under clause 8 of the agreement. |
| By 15.06.2023 | The grievance is to be raised before the Respondent no.4 by filing a representation along with a receipt of the aforesaid payment. |
| By 14.08.2023 | The Respondent no.4 is directed to look into the grievance of the petitioner with regard to the disputed amount and pass a reasoned order after |
| giving an opportunity of hearing to the | |
| petitioner or his authorized representative. The | |
| reasoned order be communicated to the | |
| petitioner through speed post. |
7. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
8. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is closed.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Pankaj
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is liable to deposit a disputed inflated amount for a Low Income Group House allotted at a fixed price.
Whether the writ petition can be disposed of by directing the Managing Director to recalculate dues under the agreement.
Rameshwar Maharaj
The State of Jharkhand
The Secretary, Housing & Urban Development Department, Government of Jharkhand
The Jharkhand State Housing Board
The Managing Director, Jharkhand State Housing Board
The Secretary, Jharkhand State Housing Board
Anubha Rawat Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
