Disposed

Sujit Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC20 Jun 2024WPC/626/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging a housing board's payment demand for plot HIG-6 and seeking possession and registration. The court disposed of the petition permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation with deposit documents; respondent no. 2 to consider it by reasoned order within 8 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to petitioner to file fresh representation with documents of deposits and his calculation; respondent no. 2 to consider it by reasoned order within 8 weeks.

Sujit Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Property and Title | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 626 of 2018

¶2

Sujit Kumar (age 52 years), s/o late Singheshwar Singh, resident of Flat No.AC/8L, 10^th Phase, Adarsh Nagar, P.O. & P.S.-Sonari, Dist.Jamshedpur (East Singhbhum)

¶3

.... Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

The Jharkhand State Housing Board through its Managing Director, Head Office at Harmu Housing Colony, P.S.-Argora, Dist.-Ranchi

¶7

The Estate Manager, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Harmu Housing Colony, P.S.-Argora, Dist.-Ranchi

¶8

The Revenue Officer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Harmu Housing Colony, P.S.-Argora, Dist.-Ranchi

¶9

The Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Harmu Housing Colony, P.S.-Argora, Dist.-Ranchi

¶10

…. Respondents

¶11

P R E S E N T

¶12

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶13

For the Petitioners : Mr. Prashant Vidyarthi, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sachin Kumar, Advocate : Ms. Surbhi, Advocate : Mr. Ravi Kerketta, SC VI : Mr. S. Parmar, AC to SC VI

¶14

By the Court:-

¶15

Heard the parties.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to issue of appropriate writ(s), order(s),

¶17

W.P. (C) No.626 of 2018

¶18

¶19

direction(s) to quash the letter dated 23.10.2017 issued by the respondent by which the petitioner has been asked to deposit a sum of Rs.5,97,362/- till 30.11.2017 and Rs.6,07,546/- till 31.12.2017 because there is error in the calculation and further , prayer has been made for issuance of appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s) directing and commanding upon the respondents to give possession of the said plot HIG-6 to the petitioner and get is registered.

¶20

Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 to 5 submits that the respondent nos.2 to 5 are ready and willing to recalculate the amount mentioned in Annexure-9 to the writ petition if the petitioner files a representation annexing therewith the relevant documents showing deposit of amount more than what has been taken into consideration by the respondent nos.2 to 5 in calculating the said amount and the respondents are ready and willing to hand over the possession of the plot HIG-6 to the petitioner on as is where is basis.

¶21

Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation annexing therewith the documents showing all the deposits made by him with the respondent nos.2 to 5 and his version of calculation and for delivery of possession of plot HIG-6 and if such a representation is made, the respondent no. 2 is directed to consider the same in accordance with law by a

¶22

W.P. (C) No.626 of 2018

¶23

¶24

reasoned and speaking order; within 8 weeks of receipt of such

¶25

representation.

¶26

This writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶27

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)

¶28

High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 20^th June, 2024 AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/-

¶29

W.P. (C) No.626 of 2018

¶30

Sujit Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sujit Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rekha Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Subham Jaiswal Alias Shubham Kumar Jaiswal Alias Dr Subham Jaiswal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ashfaque Khan Alias Ismol Alias Mohammad Asfak Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Eqbal Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bank of Baroda through Its Senior Branch Manager Sri Vijay Minj Vs Land Reforms and Revenue Department

Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Compliance Employees Provident Fund Organization Vs St Arvindo Academy Through Its Secretary Sri Rajkumar Sahu