Disposed

Surya Narayan Pandey v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC3 Jan 2023CWJC/15912/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged an encroachment in common area by a respondent allottee. The absence of action on the petitioner's representation for removal and allotment cancellation prompted the court to direct verification and subsequent remedial action within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to verify record for action on encroachment representation; if none taken, remove encroachment or cancel allotment within three weeks.

Surya Narayan Pandey Vs The State of Bihar — Landlord and Tenant | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15912 of 2021

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Surya Narayan Pandey, Son of Late Baleshwar Nath Pandey, Resident of L.I.G., Flat No. 100/18, Lohia Nagar, Kankarbagh Colony, Patna.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar.

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Department of Urban Development, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

Bihar State Housing Board, through the Managing Director, 6 Sardar Patel Marg, Patna - 15.

¶9

The Managing Director, Bihar State Housing Board, 6, Sardar Patel Marg, Patna - 15.

¶10

Prabandhak, Bhusampada cum Joint Secretary, Bihar State Housing Board, 6, Sardar Patel Marg, Patna - 15.

¶11

Kamla Devi, Wife of Late Prafulla Prasad Singh and daughter of Late Paras Nath Singh Resident of Village - Khanpura, P.S. Masaurhi, District- Patna. At Present resident of L.I.G., Flat No. 100/17, Lohia Nagar, Kankarbagh Colony, Patna -20.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nagendra Rai, Advocate For the Housing Board : Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kinkar Kumar, SC-9 Mr. Yogesh Kumar, AC to SC-9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶13

3 03-01-2023 Heard Mr. Nagendra Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Pawan Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Bihar State Housing Board and Mr. Kinkar Kumar, learned SC-9 for the State.

¶14

Sri Nagendra Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent No.6 has encroached common area, adjacent to the ground floor of L.I.G. Flat No. 100/17, Lohia

¶15

Patna High Court CWJC No.15912 of 2021(3) dt.03-01-2023 2/3

¶16

Nagar, Kankarbagh Colony, Patna, registered in the name of Late Parash Nath Singh, which has been transferred in the name of respondent No.6 Kamla Devi, wife of Late Prafulla Prasad and daughter of Late Parash Nath Singh (the original allottee). He further submitted that he has already filed his representation before the Managing Director-cum-Competent Authority under Section 59 of the Bihar State Housing Board Act for removal of such encroachment caused by respondent no.6 in common area and further for cancellation of the allotment. The representation was filed in the year, 2019, but till date no action has been taken by the Respondent.

¶17

Sri Pawan Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Bihar State Housing Board submitted that a direction be issued for removal of encroachment in accordance with law after considering the representation dated 15.11.2019.

¶18

In view of the statement made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Managing Director, Bihar State Housing Board, this Court directs to verify from the record whether any action has already been taken on the representation filed by the petitioner with respect to removal of the alleged encroachment made in common area. In case, the encroachment has not been removed, then in that case he may proceed to

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.15912 of 2021(3) dt.03-01-2023 3/3

¶20

remove the encroachment in accordance with law within a period of three weeks from today without being prejudiced by his earlier order, if any. If required he may also proceed to cancel the allotment of the encroacher in accordance with law by passing reasoned order.

¶21

With the above observations and directions, the writ petition filed on behalf of the petitioner stands disposed of.

¶22

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶23

manish/-

¶24

Surya Narayan Pandey v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surya Narayan Pandey v. The State of Bihar

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

Sunil Kumar Sinha Vs The Union of India through the Secretary

Manju Srivastava Vs The State of Bihar

Pankaj Jain Vs The State of Bihar

Archana Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Praveen Khatoon @ Praween Khatoon Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Shabir @ Md. Sabir Vs The State of Bihar