Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Koushal Kumar Singh And Anr vs Mineral Area Dev Auth on 28 March, 2014

Author: Narendra Nath Tiwari

Bench: Narendra Nath Tiwari

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                        W.P.(C) No.4070 of 2013

           Koushal Kumar Singh & Anr.                 ..........   Petitioners
                                     Versus
           The State of Jharkhand & Ors.             .........     Respondents
                                    ..............

          CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI
                              ..............

            For the Petitioners      :         Mr. Rajan Raj, Advocate
            For the State            :         J.C. to A.A.G.
            For MADA                 :         Mr. Bhawesh Kumar, Advocate
                                               Mr. Ravi Kumar, Advocate
                                               Mr. Rahul Kamlesh, Advocate
                                     .............

2/28.03.2014

: The grievance of the petitioners is that without taking any decision on the application requesting regularisation of deviation of the construction, the Mineral Area Development Authority has issued notice dated 30.05.2013 asking the petitioners to remove the structure and stop all further constructions.

It has been submitted that the petitioners have already approached the said authority for regularising the deviation and construction in question and there was no such occasion for issuing the impugned notice dated 30.05.2013. The said notice is, thus, arbitrary and requires to be quashed.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Mineral Area Development Authority submitted that the petitioners are strangers and the plan has not been sanctioned in their name and, as such, they have no locus-standi to seek any regularisation. Learned counsel, however, submitted that he has no instruction regarding the fact of the application filed by the petitioners.

Considering the above, this writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh representation requesting the -2- authorities to dispose of their application, said to be filed earlier. If such representation is filed, the said authority shall consider the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Narendra Nath Tiwari, J) Shamim/