Patna High Court - Orders
Peoples Cooperative House ... vs The State Of Bihar on 14 March, 2023
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17097 of 2015
======================================================
Peoples Cooperative House Construction Society Limited having its office at
and P.O.- Lohianagar, P.S.- Kankarbagh, Town and District- Patna, through its
Honourary Secretary, Maheshwar Prasad Sinha, Son of Late Jeo Narayan
Sinha.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Co-operative Department, Bihar,
Patna.
2. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bihar Patna.
3. Deputy Registrar, Co-Operative Societies Patna Division Patna.
4. Bihar State Housing Board through its Managing Director, Mangles Road
Patna.
5. Executive Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board, Patna Division-1
Kankarbagh.
6.1. Habiba Ahmad, wife of Late Shamshul Hoda, resident of Mohalla- Naya
Tola, P.S. Pirbahore, and District- Patna.
6.2. Sharaf Hoda son of Late Shamsul Hoda, resident of Mohalla- Naya Tola,
P.S. Pirbahore, and District- Patna.
6.3. Zain Hoda, Son of Late Shamsul Hoda, resident of Mohalla- Naya Tola, P.S.
Pirbahore, and District- Patna.
7. Municipal Corporation, Patna through its Chief Municipal Commissioner.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sc21, Advocate
For the PMC : Mr. Sanjay Prakash Verma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
14 14-03-2023Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Housing Board, learned Senior counsel for the private respondent along with learned counsel for the Patna Municipal Corporation Mr. Sanjay Prakash Verma.
The petitioner is a Cooperative Society registered Patna High Court CWJC No. 17097 of 2015(14) dt.14-03-2023 2/5 under the Bihar Cooperative Society Act, 1935 and is aggrieved by an order dated 18.08.2012 passed by the Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society, Patna, Bihar in Miscellaneous Case No. 4 of 2012 as well as the appellate order dated 07.09.2015/ 14.09.2015 passed in Appeal Case No. 183 of 2012.
By the said orders the petitioner's Society has been directed to provide a plot/ flat to the private respondent.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the private respondent had already been allotted a plot bearing no. F-218 in the year 1974 but on his failure to make any construction the same was encroached by the Housing Board. It is next submitted that once a plot has been allotted by the petitioner's Society, their obligation ends and if there is any dispute thereafter it has to be resolved by the parties concerned.
It is further submitted that when the Housing Board had encroached the land of the petitioner which was allotted to him by the Society the private respondent instead of approaching the Housing Board, approached the Patna High Court CWJC No. 17097 of 2015(14) dt.14-03-2023 3/5 Registrar Cooperative Society which led to passing of the impugned orders whereby the petitioner has been directed to ensure that a flat which is going to be constructed on Plot No. 184 to Plot No. 187 be allotted to him, along with ancillary directions.
Learned counsel next submits that had the flats been constructed then definitely one flat would have been given to the private respondent to end the dispute but the construction has not even progressed for the reason that Vigilance Case No. 1/1991 is still pending and the Vigilance Officer, Patna, Regional Development Authority by an order dated 21.12.1993 in Vigilance Case No. 1 of 1991 had directed not to proceed with the construction and the said order till date is in vogue despite PRDA Act being repealed by the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 but in view of the Saving Clause provided under Section 488 of the Bihar Municipal Act, the said order stands saved. It is next submitted that the said Vigilance Case is still pending.
Learned counsel for the petitioner makes an interesting submission and submits that it absolutely does not stand to reason that on what basis the Housing Board Patna High Court CWJC No. 17097 of 2015(14) dt.14-03-2023 4/5 encroached the land of the private respondent when the same was allotted to him by the petitioner's Society. It is further submitted that the then Housing Department had leased out 131.12 Acres of land for developing the colony in the year 1964 and subsequently had executed registered sale deed on 17.01.1968, further the Housing Department had sanctioned 1600 plots of different dimension with respect to 131.12 Acres of land so allotted to the petitioner's Society. It is next submitted that though 1600 plots were sanctioned but on the spot there were only 1590 plots.
Learned counsel next submits that the dispute is not that whether the plot sanctioned was 1600 or 1590, but what is admitted is that the erstwhile Housing Department had leased out 131.12 Acres of land to the Society and the petitioner out of the said land had allotted the land in dispute to the private respondent.
It is next submitted that it is not the case of the Housing Board that the land which was allotted to the private respondent was not within 131.12 Acres of land so allotted to the Society, it is thus submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that when the erstwhile Housing Patna High Court CWJC No. 17097 of 2015(14) dt.14-03-2023 5/5 Department had leased out 131.12 Acres of land in favour of the Society, then on what basis the land of the private respondent was encroached by the Housing Board.
Learned counsel appearing for Housing Board is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner but submits that he will file a supplementary affidavit clarifying the issue as to whether the land which is alleged to be encroached by the Housing Board is within 131.12 Acres which was allotted to the Society or the land of which possession has been taken by the Housing Board is beyond 131.12 Acres.
In the event, if it is found that the possession of the land which has been taken by the Housing Board is within 131.12 Acres of land which was allotted to the petitioner's Society the consequences would follow.
Put up this case on 12.04.2023 maintaining its position.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) GauravSinha/-
U