Jharkhand High Court
Abha Kumari Sinha vs The State Of Jharkhand on 2 March, 2023
Author: Rajesh Shankar
Bench: Rajesh Shankar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 5795 of 2022
---
1. Abha Kumari Sinha
2. N.P.Chakraborty
3. Smt. M. Anuradha Rao
4. Smt. Meena Choudhary
5. Smt. Santra Devi
6. Smt. Dipa Dhar Chowdhary
7. Pronoy Kumar Ghosh (P.K.Ghosh) ... ... Petitioners Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Jamshedpur Notified Area Committee through its Special Officer, Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum
3. The Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur
4. Md. Shamim Akhtar
5. Pradeep Churiwala .... ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioners : Mr. S.L. Agarwal, Advocate For the Resp. Nos. 1 & 3 : Mr. Shray Mishra, A.C. to A.G. For the Resp. No. 2 : Mr. Vijay Kumar Roy, Advocate Order No. 03 Dated: 02.03.2023 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent no. 2- the Special Officer, Jamshedpur Notified Area Committee to take action in terms with the provisions of Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 (in short, "the Act, 2011) against the respondent nos. 4 and 5 for making illegal construction in a building, namely, Radha Apartment, Holding No. 26, Kashidih New Layout, New Baradwari, Sakchi, Jamshedpur.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent nos. 4 and 5, who are the developers of the said building, have violated the approved map by constructing shops in basement area which is earmarked for parking in the said building. A generator room has also been constructed in the basement area due to which only 1/4th part of the basement has remained for parking purposes. Running of generator in the basement area also spreads toxic smoke affecting health of the residents of the said building. The respondent nos. 4 and 5 have also violated the safety rules by installing a high frequency mobile tower on top of the roof without obtaining 'No Objection Certificate' from the competent authority. The petitioners represented the respondent no. 2 on 05.08.2021 raising their grievance and the said respondent got the matter enquired by an 2 inquiry committee consisting of Junior Engineer and a trained Assistant of Jamshedpur Notified Area Committee. The inquiry committee submitted its report stating that the respondent nos. 4 and 5 constructed shops in the basement of the building in question by making deviation in the sanctioned map and encroaching the said area. The committee also found several irregularities committed by the respondent nos. 4 and 5 thereby violating the provisions of the Act, 2011 as well as Jharkhand Building Bye- law, 2016. On the basis of the report of the inquiry committee, the respondent no. 2 issued notice to the respondent nos. 4 and 5 vide letter no. 978 dated 25.03.2022 directing them to remove the encroachment from the basement of the said building as well as the mobile tower and to restore the earmarked parking area of the basement, however they did not follow the said direction. The petitioners again represented the respondent no. 2 as well as different authorities of the state government requesting inter alia to take action in this regard, however the same remained unresponded which has compelled them to prefer the present writ petition.
3. Mr. Vijay Kumar Roy, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2, submits that if the petitioners prefer a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no. 2, an appropriate decision in this regard will be taken within a timeframe.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of prayer made by the petitioners in the present writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioners are given liberty to prefer a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no. 2. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no. 2, after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioners/their representatives as well as the respondent nos. 4 and 5/their representatives, shall take an appropriate informed decision within six weeks from the date of filing of the said representation.
5. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction.
Ritesh/ (Rajesh Shankar, J.)