Disposed¶25

Prakash Munjal And Ors. v. Urban Development Department

Jharkhand HC14 Mar 2024WPC/4328/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Ranchi Municipal Corporation Transfer Station; alleged encroachment on private land; M.S. Plot No.1795 sub plot 1795/E, village Siram, Pargana Khukhra, Thana No.210, P.S. Chutia, Ranchi; sale deed dated 31.03.1953; dumping ground for more than 30 years; affidavit dated 12.08.2016; 65 decimals; 7.636 acres; 4.38 acres; boundary wall; JUIDCO Ltd.; Eagle Infra India Ltd.; writ petition disposed of without adjudication; High Court of Jharkhand; Dr. Justice S.N. Pathak.

What did the court decide?

None; the writ petition was disposed of on the strength of respondent-RMC's stand that no construction or encroachment had occurred on the petitioners' land. ¶25

Prakash Munjal And Ors. Vs Urban Development Department — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the writ petition was disposed of on the strength of respondent-RMC's stand that no construction or encroachment had occurred on the petitioners' land.

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents, including the Ranchi Municipal Corporation, were making any construction over the portion of the petitioners' land comprised in Municipal Survey plot no.1795, sub plot no.1795/E, village Siram, P.S. Chutia, District-Ranchi, so as to warrant a command directing them not to construct thereon.

¶21

Court's answer

Proceeding on the specific stand of respondent-RMC (recorded in its affidavit dated 12.08.2016 and urged by its counsel) that it had neither encroached the petitioners' boundary wall nor made any construction over their land, the Court held that nothing remained to be adjudicated and disposed of the writ petition, since the petitioners' grievance did not exist.

¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(C) No. 4328 of 2016, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Dr. Justice S.N. Pathak, 14.03.2024): Four petitioner brothers sought a direction restraining the respondents — including the Ranchi Municipal Corporation, JUIDCO Ltd. and Eagle Infra India Ltd. — from constructing over part of their land in M.S. Plot No.1795, sub plot no.1795/E, village Siram, Pargana Khukhra, Thana No.210, P.S. Chutia, Ranchi, purchased by their father by sale deed dated 31.03.1953. On the Court's direction, RMC's affidavit dated 12.08.2016 (paras 5 and 10) stated that the proposed Transfer Station would be built on 65 decimals of M.S. Plot No.1795 (total area 7.636 acres) — land RMC had used as its dumping ground for more than the last 30 years — and not on the petitioners' 4.38-acre boundary-walled holding, and that RMC had neither encroached the boundary wall nor made any construction over it. Accepting this specific stand, the Court found nothing remained to be adjudicated and disposed of the writ petition as the petitioners' grievance did not exist.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 4328 of 2016

1.Prakash Munjal

2.Harish Munjal

3.Ganesh Munjal 4.Jayant Munjal

………. Petitioners

Versus

1.State of Jharkhand

2.Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, District-Ranchi

¶11

3.Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, District-Ranchi

¶12

4.Administrator-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi, District-Ranchi

¶13

5.Town Commissioner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi DistrictRanchi

¶14

6.Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Jharkhand Urban Infrastructure Development Company Ltd. (JUIDCO Ltd.), 2^nd floor Vasundhara Mega Mart, Near Argora Chowk, District-Ranchi

¶15

7.Eagle Infra India Ltd., House No.396B, Road No.4C, Ashok Nagar, Argora, Ranchi-834001 ………. Respondents

¶16

¶17

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N.PATHAK

¶18

----------For the Petitioners : Mr. Amar Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, AC to AAG-V For the Resp. No.5 : Mr. L. C. N. Shadeo, Advocate For the Resp. No.6 : Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate Md. Ashghar, Advocate Mr. Raj Vardhan, Advocate

¶19

¶20

18/ 14.03.2024 Petitioners have approached this Court for commanding upon

¶21

the respondents and directing them not to make any construction over the portion of the lands comprised within Municipal Survey plot no.1795, sub plot no.1795/E situated at village Siram, Pargana Khukra, Thana No.-210, P.S.- Chutia, District-Ranchi belonging to the petitioners having purchased by the father of the petitioner by way of sale deed dated 31.03.1953 and specific boundary has been constructed over the concerned land.

¶22

2. The matter was heard and thereafter direction was given to the respondent-RMC to file an affidavit. From the affidavit dated 12.08.2016 at para-5 it appears that the Ranchi Municipal Corporation has clearly stated that proposed Transfer Station is to be constructed on 65 decimals of M.S. Plot No.1795, the total area of which is 7.636 acres as would be evident from Annexure-1 to the writ application and not on the portion of

¶23

-2-

¶24

the petitioners’ land which is only 4.38 acres. Petitioners’ land is surrounded by boundary wall. In view of specific stand as argued by learned counsel for the respondent-RMC that they have not encroached the boundary wall neither they have made any construction over the same. The construction if any, which also finds support from para-10 of the said affidavit “it is reiterated that the proposed Transfer Station is not being constructed on the land of the petitioners but on the land which the Ranchi Municipal Corporation has been using as its dumping ground for more than last 30 years.”

¶25

3. In view of the specific stand of the respondent-RMC, nothing remains to be adjudicated, accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of, since the grievances of the petitioner does not exists.

¶26

Rohit-

Prakash Munjal And Ors. v. Urban Development Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash Munjal And Ors. v. Urban Development Department

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

Lipika Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand Thro Its Secretary Principal Secretary School Education and Literacy Depart

Dr Surender Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand Thro the Secretary Department of Helath Medical Education and Family Welfare

Dr Prashant Gupta Vs State of Jharkhand Thro the Secretary Department of Health Medical Education and Family Welfare

K.Sushila Devi Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Dilip Kumar Ram Vs Police

Masih Marandi Vs Rural Dev Dept