Disposed

Naru Pahan v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC12 Jul 2023WPC/4853/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL, the petitioner sought removal of road encroachments in Ranchi and shops near a Samadhi Sthal. The Court directed the RMC to prevent new encroachments and ordered removal of existing encroachments within three months after following legal procedures.

What did the court decide?

RMC to prevent future encroachments; State and RMC to remove existing encroachments from Lalpur Chowk to Kokar Chowk and near Birsa Samadhi Sthal within three months after legal procedure.

Naru Pahan Vs the State of Jharkhand — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P(PIL) No. 4853 of 2021

¶3

Naru Pahan

¶4

... ... ... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Jharkhand

¶7

Secretary, Road Construction Depart., Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶8

Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi

¶9

Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Municipal Commissioner, Ranchi

¶10

Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi

¶11

Superintendent of Police, Traffic, Ranchi

¶12

Officer-in-charge, P.S Lalpur, Ranchi

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

¶15

CORAM: SRI SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA, C.J. SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶16

¶17

For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate For the State: Mr. Piyush Chitresh, AC to AG For the RMC: Mr. L.C.N. Shahdeo, Advocate

¶18

¶19

07 /Dated: 12.07.2023

¶20

Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court passed the following, (Per. Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, C J.)

¶21

ORDER

¶22

By filing this W.P(PIL), the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 to remove the encroachment from the road starting from Lalpur Chowk to Kokar Chowk whose alleged breadth is 120 ft. as per 2037 Master Plan but due to encroachment of vegetable market, the road shrinked to only 20ft. The petitioner has also prayed for directing the respondent no.4 to remove the meat shops, chicken shops and liquor shops situated near Birsa Samadihi Sthal which is the sanctum Santorium of the State of Jharkhand. Petitioner has also prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus directing upon the respondent to remove the vegetable market and shops so that the rights of the user of that road between Lalpur chowk to Kokar Chowk can be protected. He has also made an alternative prayer for relief, if any, the court deems fit and proper to be passed in this case.

¶23

Counter-affidavit has been filed by the Assistant Administrator of the Ranchi Municipal Corporation.

¶24

-2-

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner would draw attention of the court to paragraph 5 of the said counter-affidavit wherein it has been stated that Fish Market and Chicken/Meat sellers have already been shifted from the place where the Samadhi Sthal of Bhagwan Birsa Bunda is situated.

¶26

We direct the Ranchi Municipal Corporation to take appropriate steps to see that the encroachment is not again committed by such sellers of meat, fish and chicken in future. For that reason the Ranchi Municipal Corporation should remain vigilant. As far as removal of encroachment from the Lalpur Chowk to Kokar Chowk is concerned, we further direct that the State as well as the Ranchi Municipal Corporation shall take appropriate steps to remove all encroachment within a period of three months hence, after following the procedure established by law and after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶27

With such observation this W.P(PIL) stands disposed of

¶28

All pending Interlocutory Applications stand disposed of.

¶29

No orders as to costs.

¶30

Grant urgent certified copy of this order as per the Rules.

¶31

Free copy of the order be handed over to Mr. Piyush Chitresh, AC to AG and Mr. L.C. N. Shahdeo, counsel appearing on behalf of RMC for early compliance.

¶32

(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, C.J.)

¶33

(Ananda Sen, J.)

¶34

Anjali/

Naru Pahan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naru Pahan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhaskar Nandan and Ors. Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Rajesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shree Balaji Enterprises Through Its Proprietor Namely Gyarsi Lal Goyal Vs The Union Of India Through The Secretary Ministry Of Coal And Ors.

Shiv Kishor Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dr Satyendra Kumar Chaudhary Vs Health

Suresh Prasad Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary Water Resources Deptt