IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Jai Ram Sharma @ Gai Ram Sharma S/o Late Chandrika Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
W.P.(C) No.6570 of 2016, W.P.(C) No.6576 of 2016, W.P.(C) No.6604 of 2016, W.P.(C) No.6606 of 2016, W.P.(C) No.6877 of 2016, W.P.(C) No.3805 of 2019
Decided on : 23-04-2024
[SUBSTITUTION] - [LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES] - [Jharkhand State Housing Board Act, 2000, Section 83 A] - [The court allowed the substitution of legal representatives for a deceased petitioner and quashed notices issued under Section 83 A of the Jharkhand State Housing Board Act, 2000. The court interpreted the provisions of the Act, emphasizing the lack of authority in the notices issued by the Housing Board, which were deemed to have been issued without proper jurisdiction. The decision underscored the rights of the petitioners as allottees of rental houses and the need for equitable treatment in similar circumstances. The court's ruling was influenced by the principle of non-discrimination and the established practice of rental-cum-purchase agreements.]
JUDGMENT :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
I.A. No.3171 of 2024 in W.P.(C) No.6606 of 2016
Heard the parties.
This interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to substitute the legal representatives of the sole deceased petitioner namely Lal Bahadur Singh who died on 04.03.2023 leaving behind his only two legal representatives whose names, parentages and addresses have been mentioned in para-3 of the instant interlocutory application. It is further submitted that unless the substitution, as prayed for, is allowed, the legal representative of the sole deceased petitioner will be highly prejudiced.
Mr. Shashi Kant Mishra & Associates have filed power on behalf of the legal representatives of the sole deceased petitioner namely Lal Bahadur Singh.
Considering the aforesaid facts, the prayer for substitution of only two legal representatives of the sole deceased petitioner namely Lal Bahadur Singh, as prayed for, is allowed.
Registry is directed to incorporate the names of only two legal representatives of the sole deceased petitioner namely Lal Bahadur Singh whose names, parentages and addresses has been mentioned in para-3 of the instant interlocutory application as petitioner No.1 (a) to 1 (b) and to mention the word ‘Dead’ against the name of sole deceased petitioner namely Lal Bahadur Singh with red ink in the cause title of the memo of this writ petition.
This interlocutory application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.6570 of 2016 along with other allied cases
1. All these six Writ Petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with several prayers i.e. W.P. (C) No.6570 of 2016 has been filed with a prayer to quash the Notice No.923 dated 27.09.2016 issued under Section 83 A of the Jharkhand State Housing Board Act, 2000 passed by the respondent No.8- Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi on the ground that it has been issued without power, authority, and jurisdiction by which the petitioner occupied the Rental House No.R-11/5 situated at Harmu Housing Colony, Ranchi, W.P. (C) No.6576 of 2016 has been filed with a prayer to quash the Notice No.926 dated 27.09.2016 issued under Section 83 A of the Jharkhand State Housing Board Act, 2000 passed by the respondent No.8- Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi on the ground that it has been issued without power, authority and jurisdiction by which the petitioner occupied the Rental House No.R-25/6 situated at Harmu Housing Colony, Ranchi, W.P. (C) No.6604 of 2016 has been filed with a prayer to quash the Notice No.927 dated 27.09.2016 issued under Section 83 A of the Jharkhand State Housing Board Act, 2000 passed by the respondent No.8- Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi on the ground that it has been issued without power, authority and jurisdiction by which the petitioner occupied the Rental House No.R-18/5 situated at Harmu Housing Colony, Ranchi, W.P. (C) No.6606 of 2016 has been filed with a prayer to quash the Notice No.692 dated 23.07.2016 issued under provision of the Jharkhand State Housing Board Act, 2000 passed by the respondent No.8- Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi on the ground that it has been issued without power, authority and jurisdiction by which the petitioner occupied the Rental House No.R-20/6 situated at Harmu Housing Colony, Ranchi, W.P. (C) No.6877 of 2016 has been filed with a prayer to quash the Notice No.943 dated 27.09.2016 issued under Section 83 A of the Jharkhand State Housing Board Act, 2000 passed by the respondent No.8- Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi on the ground that it has been issued without power, authority and jurisdiction by which the petitioner occupied the Rental House No.R-22/5 situated at Harmu Housing Colony, Ranchi and W.P. (C) No.3805 of 2019 has been filed with a prayer to quash the Notice No.922 dated 27.09.2016 issued under Section 83 A of the Jharkhand State Housing Board Act, 2000 pas
[The court established that notices issued without proper authority under the Jharkhand State Housing Board Act, 2000, are invalid, and that allottees have a right to equitable treatment in the conte....
The Housing Board's cancellation of plot allotment was invalid due to lack of notice and failure to follow due process, violating principles of natural justice.
Petitioners cannot challenge allotment amounts after acquiescing to the allotment orders and making partial payments, as they were unauthorized occupants without valid claims.
Out-of-turn government accommodation allotment under exigency must be by House Allotment Committee per rules; arbitrary executive directions bypassing procedure illegal, violative of equality and rul....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the lease-cum-sale agreement and the determination of the Panchayat's right over the property.
The Jharkhand State Housing Board cannot charge compound interest on amounts already paid; only simple interest on outstanding amounts is permissible.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the cancellation of government lease, governed by statutory regulations, can be justified if the allotment was obtained by misrepresentation o....
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.