Jharkhand High Court
Mohan Lal Saraogi vs Jharkhand State Housing Board on 13 January, 2010
Author: R. K. Merathia
Bench: Ramesh Kumar Merathia
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 1935 of 2009.
---
Mohan Lal Saraogi ... ... ... ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The Jharkhand State Housing
Board through its Managing
Director, Harmu Housing
Colony, Ranchi.
2. The Revenue Officer, Jharkhand
State Housing Board, Ranchi.
3. The Executive Engineer, Jharkhand
State Housing Board, Adityapur,
Jamshedpur, Singhbhum East.
4. The Manager, Estate-II, Jharkhand
State Housing Board, Ranchi ... ... ... ... Respondents
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR MERATHIA
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. Sachin Kumar, Advocate.
---
2. 13.1.2010. It is submitted by Mr. Manoj Tandon, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, that though the petitioner cleared all the installments within the time granted, as per the agreement, as far back as in the year 1999, but even then, a huge demand has been raised by letter dated 7.6.2008 (Annexure 5).
Mr. Sachin Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, submitted that in the absence of counter affidavit, he is not in a position to accept or controvert the statements made in the writ petition. However, in view of Clause 25 of the agreement, the petitioner should have move first the Managing Director of the Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi.
In the circumstances, the petitioner is directed to file a representation before the Managing Director of the Jharkhand State Housing Board, Harmu Housing Colony, Ranchi (respondent no. 1) within three weeks from today which will be disposed of by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the Revenue Officer, Jharkhand State Housing Board (respondent no. 2), as early as possible and preferably within six weeks from the date of receipt of such representation.
Till order is passed by the Managing Director, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner for realisation of the demand vide letter dated 7.6.2008 (Annexure 5).
2.It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case of the parties.
With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of. However, no costs.
(R. K. Merathia, J) AKS Cp.2.