Dismissed¶21

Anant Kumar Dubey v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC1 Jul 2024WPC/364/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintainability of writ petition; encroachment and demolition of school boundary wall; claim for compensation; alternative remedy of civil suit; delay of about eight years; Shankar Dayal High School, Roam; oral donation by predecessors; Kalyan Kumar Dubey application dated 16.07.2013; Thana No. 156, Khata No. 139, Plot No. 92; 0.41 acre; Topchanchi Circle, Dhanbad; Deputy Commissioner Dhanbad; Block Development Officer Topchanchi; liberty to approach civil court; Rajesh Shankar, J.; decision dated 01.07.2024.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to take recourse for redressal of his grievance before the competent court of civil jurisdiction, if so advised. ¶21

Anant Kumar Dubey Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 364 of 2021

¶2

Anant Kumar Dubey

¶3

… … Petitioner Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand

¶5

The Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad

¶6

The Circle Officer, Topchanchi Circle, Dhanbad

¶7

The Block Development Officer, Topchanchi, Dhanbad

¶8

… … Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶10

----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Anuj Kumar Trivedi, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sharabhil Ahmed, AC to SC (Mines)-I

¶11

-----

¶12

Order No. 09 Dated: 01.07.2024

¶13

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to demolish illegal structure erected by the respondents over the petitioner’s land without issuing any notice with respect to such encroachment or without providing any opportunity of hearing to him to make objections on the same. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondents to provide adequate compensation to the petitioner for occupying his said land by the respondents.

¶14

2. Mr. Sharabhil Ahmed, AC to SC (Mines)-I appearing on behalf of the respondents, refers to paragraph no. 11 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 to 4, which reads as under:

¶15

“11. That with regard to the statement made in paragraph-8 of the writ application, it is humbly submitted that Shankar Dayal High School, Roam is running for last 45 – 50 years, and the petitioner or his predecessors never made any objection at any point of time. As matter of fact, Shankar Dayal High School, Roam was constructed over the land in question with the consent of the predecessors of the petitioner and they have orally donated the land in question for the purpose

¶16

¶17

of construction of the said school as there was no school

¶18

in the vicinity and as such now after lapse of 45 – 50 years, the petitioner cannot claim compensation etc.”

¶19

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to application dated 16.07.2013 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) made by one of the coparceners namely, Kalyan Kumar Dubey before the respondent no. 3 – the Circle Officer, Topchanchi Circle, Dhanbad and submits that the said respondent was duly informed that boundary wall of the school was constructed over 0.41 acre of land appertaining to Thana No. 156, Khata No. 139, Plot No. 92 and was therefore requested to get the said land vacated from illegal possession of the said school.

¶20

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on consideration of the said letter dated 16.07.2013, it appears that as per the measurement done at the instance of the said coparcener of the petitioner, it came to light that the boundary wall of the school was constructed over the said land by occupying the petitioner’s land. Under the said circumstance, the petitioner should have taken recourse before the competent court of civil jurisdiction as his claim is required to be determined on the basis of the evidences to be led by him instead of preferring the present writ petition that too after about eight years.

¶21

5. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to take recourse for redressal of his grievance before the competent court of civil jurisdiction, if so advised.

¶22

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶23

Manish

¶24

Anant Kumar Dubey v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anant Kumar Dubey v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd. through Its Deputy Manager Prafull Choudhary Vs Anita Devi

Ravindra Mahto Alias Chhota Beyas Alias Ravindra Mehta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nagendra Das Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Binod Anand Alias Prajapati Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sangeeta Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Janeshwar Prasad Singh Vs State of Jharkhand