Court affirms tenants' rights to remain in possession until proper alternative arrangements are made by the state officials.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

2 24-12-2025 1. The petitioners are allottee of shops/godowns in the premises of the then Biharsharif Agriculture Marketing Committee. They have filed the present writ application being aggrieved by the show cause notices issued to them by the respondent no. 6 requiring them to show cause and produce the documents in support of their claim that the petitioners have been running the business from the premises for which the shops/godowns were allotted in their favour.

2. An I.A. has been filed bearing I.A. No. 01 of 2025 bringing on record four separate orders, dated 13.12.2025, passed by respondent no. 6 against the petitioner nos. 1, 4, 6 and 7 directing them to vacate the premises on the ground that the allotment in their favour has been cancelled. They have been asked to vacate the premises within seven days failing which the premises would be vacated by taking recourse of law. 3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been allotted shops/godowns starting from 1994 onwards for running their business relating to agriculture products. The change of business was also permitted with the approval of the concerned authority. The petitioners have been running the shops/godowns for the last thirty years. The respondents initially tried to vacate the premises of various allottees on the ground that the premises are required for construction of the smart city project. This led to filing of the writ petition by the aggrieved allottees in CWJC No. 15672 of 2021. The writ application was disposed by a Division Bench of this Court in the light of the letter dated 10.08.2021 by which a guideline has been issued by the Secretary, Agriculture Department addressed to SDO-cum-Special Officer Krishi Utpadan Bazar Samiti (dissolved) that before removing the valid allottee from the land/shop/godown for smart city project, a new construction of similar type has to be made and such allottees have to be shifted in a newly constructed structure on provisional basis.

4. It has further been submitted that the petitioners have been running their livelihood from the allotted shop, but the respondent authority, by hook and by crook, for one reason or the other, are trying to remove the allottees from their respective shops. Petitioners No. 1, 4, 6, and 7 shall separately challenge the order by way of separate I.A. by which the petitioner nos. 1, 4, 6 and 7 allotment have been cancelled and they have been asked to vacate the premises.

5. Mr. Prabhu Narayan Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents, prays for and granted four weeks' time to file detailed counter-affidavit.

6. Regards being had to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners have been running their business from the shops allotted to them about 30 to 35 years back, let no coercive steps be taken against the petitioners during pendency of the present writ application.

7. List this case along with CWJC No. 1576 of 2023 and analogous cases.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)