IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Geeta Devi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Others - Respondents
W.P. (Cr.) No. 40 of 2022
Decided on : 08-03-2022
Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 - Section 71-A – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 144 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226, 21,32 - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order 9 Rule 9 - Indian Easements Act, 1882 - Section 15 - House - Stopped Erecting a Boundary Wall - Petitioners' house has been stopped by erecting a boundary wall, Court asked learned State counsel as well as Senior Superintendent of Police, to find out solution so that access to house of petitioners be provided – Held, Respondent-Ranchi Municipal Corporation shall ensure to take drive for demolishing part of construction whereby access of petitioner has been blocked - Court is of view that this demolition must be carried out within twenty four hours, however, on repeated request of Deputy Commissioner, and Senior Superintendent of Police, through Senior Standing Counsel on ground of going of Assembly session, time is allowed for demolition - Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi and Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi, who are present in Court shall provide all protection to authorities of Ranchi Municipal Corporation to carry out direction given by this Court - Respondent- Municipal Corporation and respondent-State shall file affidavit to that effect - Deputy Commissioner, and Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi assured Court that they will ensure to provide adequate security to carry out demolition – Ordered accordingly.
JUDGMENT :
This petition was registered on 14.02.2022 and the matter was mentioned before this Court and seeing the exigency in the matter, this writ petition was directed to be listed on 15.02.2022. Paragraph 7 of the order dated 15.02.2022 is quoted herein below:
“7. It has been disclosed in the petition that petitioner no.1 is in peaceful possession over the land bearing R.S. Khata No.78, Plot No.863, area 2 Kathas (3.30 decimals) of VillageHundru, Thana- Doranda (now-Airport), District- Ranchi since 1954-55. S.A.R. Case No.742/2008-09 was instituted under Section 71-A of Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 in the court of Special S.A.R. Officer, Ranchi and vide order dated 05.04.2009, the petitioner no.1 was directed to deposit a sum of Rs.95,000/- per Katha in lieu of compensation to the complainant. In compliance of the said order, such amount was deposited by petitioner no.1. The land in question was mutated in the office of the Circle Officer, Argora Circle, Ranchi vide Mutation Case No.5232-R-27/2011-12. The name of the petitioner no.1 is also mutated in the Ranchi Municipal Corporation and she is paying Holding Tax to the Ranchi Municipal Corporation. On 31.01.2022 when petitioner no.2 visited her house along with petitioner no.1 located at New Saket Nagar, Hinoo, Ranchi, they found that the only approach road of the house was encroached by Ajay Kachhap (respondent no.7) and others by erecting a boundary wall and constructing a room upon the same.”
2. This is the second incident in the capital city of Jharkhand. Identical position was therein W.P.(Cr.) No.137 of 2021 with W.P.(Cr.) No.416 of 2021, which were mentioned by the learned counsel stating therein that in the broad day light and in presence of the police, by way of erecting boundary wall, the main gate of the building of the petitioner has been blocked. In that case, the private respondent was also noticed. After report of the Ranchi Municipal Corporation, direction was issued to remove the encroachment and recover the cost from the private respondent. The private respondent has herself removed the encroachment and report to that effect has been filed by the officer of the State that the encroachment in question has been removed by the private respondent herself. This is the second incident before this Court, whereby, the access road of the petitioner has been blocked. On that day, respondent no.3 was directed to ensure the passage of entry of the petitioners' house and to apprise this Court as to why status quoante on the premises be not maintained by tomorrow i.e. 16.02.2022.
3. This writ petition was again taken on 16.02.2022. Pursuant to the order dated 15.02.2022, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi has appeared in person on that day along with learned State counsel Mrs. Vandana Singh, learned Sr. S.C.-III and they took time and submit that they will find out and provide access road to the petitioners. Paragraph 7 of the said order is quoted herein below:
“7. In view of the above facts and considering the detailed order dated 15.02.2022 and also considering that the access road of the petitioners' house has been stopped by erecting a boundary wall, the Court asked the learned State counsel as well as the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi to find out solution so that access to the house of the petitioners be provided. They fairly submit that they will find out and provide access road to the petitioners and for that they seek some time.”
4. On their fair submission, the matter was adjourned till 20.02.2022 and the appearance of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi was dispensed with.
5. The matter was again taken on 21.02.2022 and on that day, counter affidavit was filed on behalf of respondent no.3 and in one of the report of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Hatia, Ranchi, it has been stated in many words that there was no road and the land in question was of Sarana Samiti. In view of the pleadings and submissions of the learned counsel fo
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.