Remanded

Anjari Devi @ Anjir Devi v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC24 Sept 2013CWJC/11109/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the housing board's demand for immediate full payment of a plot price. The court held Regulation 43 allows the board to set payment terms but, recognizing the petitioner's age and history of litigation, directed the board to refer the case to a Pricing Committee for a balanced decision on payment deadlines.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file application before the Managing Director to be referred to the Pricing Committee for consideration and decision within three months to determine payment terms.

Anjari Devi @ Anjir Devi Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

Patna High Court CWJC No.11109 of 2012 (5) dt.24-09-2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11109 of 2012

¶3

====================================================== 1. Anjari Devi @ Anjir Devi Wife Of Late (Capt.) N. K.P. Sinha Resident Of: Salimpur, Ward No. 3, Police Station - Barh, District - Patna .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar, Through the Principal Secretary, Department Of Urban Development, Government Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Bihar State Housing Board, Through Its Managing Director, 6, Sardar Patel Marg, P.S.- Sachiwalay, District - Patna - 15 3. The Managing Director, Bihar State Housing Board, 6, Sardar Patel Marg, P.S. - Sachiwalay, District - Patna - 15 4. The Secretary, Bihar State Housing Board, 6, Sardar Patel Marg, P.S.Sachiwalay, District - Patna - 15 5. The Manager , Estate-Cum-Joint Secretary, Bihar State Housing Board, 6, Sardar Patel Marg, P.S.- Sachiwalay, District - Patna 6. The Executive Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board, Division - 2, Hanuman Nagar, Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumr Singh, Advocate Mr. Satyendra Prasad Singh, Advocate For the State : Ms. Nivedita Nirvikar, GP 3 Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, AC to GP 3 For the Housing Board : Mr. Ram Kishore singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA ORAL ORDER 5 24-09-2013 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the Housing Board. The petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of memo no. 3456 dated 13.04.2012 on the ground that it has wrongly/arbitrary been calculated with interest upto April, 2012 and also to grant monthly installment for the amount to be deposited as per clause 5 of the allotment letter dated 13.04.2012 and further to issue four copies of format of hire purchase agreement for plot of land as per

¶4

Patna High Court CWJC No.11109 of 2012 (5) dt.24-09-2013

¶5

clause 9 of the said agreement.

¶6

In the course of argument of the case, it has come out that a Pricing Committee has been set up by the Board by the order of a Division Bench of this Court in which such disputes with regard to valuation are to be considered. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already filed an application for her case to be considered by the Pricing Committee on 11.05.2012, but no decision has been communicated.

¶7

It is further submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that 40 per cent of the total amount of Rs. 18,60,754/- has already been deposited by the petitioner and for depositing the remaining amount, the petitioner should be granted installments.

¶8

In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Board, a stand has been taken that the Board by its resolution taken in its 233^rd meeting dated 04.09.2009 and 236^th meeting dated 12.03.2010 has decided that no installments should be granted and the entire updated price has to be paid at one go.

¶9

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has sought to rely upon regulation 43 in support of his stand. On consideration of regulation 43, it is evident that it provides for deposit of 30 per cent of the disposal price in the case of High Income Group immediately and the balance amount

¶10

Patna High Court CWJC No.11109 of 2012 (5) dt.24-09-2013

¶11

shall be paid within such period as may be determined by the Board and specified in the allotment order. It is thus submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that it is not open to the Board to demand the entire price at one go.

¶12

In my view, such stand is not supported by the regulation. Clause (ii) of Regulation 43 merely provides that the balance amount after deposit of the initial 30 per cent is to be paid within the time as may be determined by the Board, but it does not prevent the Board from deciding that the balance 70 per cent has to be paid immediately. There is nothing in the regulation to show that further time has to be given for depositing the remaining 70 per cent amount or installment has to be granted. Such matters have clearly been left to be determined by the Board, which the Board has done in its 233^rd and 236^th meetings in which it was decided that the entire amount shall be deposited immediately.

¶13

In the aforesaid view of the matter, I see no reason to interfere with the allotment letter dated 13.04.2012.

¶14

Learned Counsel for the petitioner however submits that the petitioner is an old widowed lady and the Board has compelled her to repeatedly approach the authorities, as also this Court, before the allotment has been made for which she has been running around since the year

¶15

Patna High Court CWJC No.11109 of 2012 (5) dt.24-09-2013

¶16

1990, and as such, she may be granted a reasonable time to deposit the remaining 70 per cent amount.

¶17

In the aforesaid circumstances, the writ application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh application for consideration of her case along with a copy of this order before the Managing Director of the respondent-Board, who shall refer her case to the Pricing Committee. The petitioner will file her application within a period of three weeks from today and the Board will refer her case to the Pricing Committee forthwith and the Pricing Committee shall consider and decide the matter within a period of three months from the date of filing of the application by the petitioner. After the decision of the Pricing Committee is communicated to the petitioner, the petitioner shall deposit the amount within a period of one month thereafter.

¶18

(Ramesh Kumar Datta, J)

¶19

Prabhakar Anand/-

Anjari Devi @ Anjir Devi v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anjari Devi @ Anjir Devi v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

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

M/s Jay Mata Di Timber Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ramanand Prasad Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Chandeshwar Prasad Gupta Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Mahanth Binod Giri Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Shambhoo Nath Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ranjit Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.