Himachal Pradesh High Court
State Bank Of India vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 18 May, 2018
Bench: Sanjay Karol, Ajay Mohan Goel
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA .
CWP No.: 946 of 2018
Date of Decision: 18.05.2018.
______________________________________________________________________ State Bank of India, Charna .....Petitioner.
Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others .....Respondents.
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General, with M/s Ranjan Sharma & Ritta Goswami, Additional Advocate Generals, for respondents No. 1 to 3.
Mr. T.S. Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No. 4.
Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice(Oral):
In the present petition, the petitioner lays challenge to the action of the respondentsauthorities in disconnecting the supply of electricity meter installed in the tenanted premises built over Khasra No. 2376/1623/1, measuring 3 biswas.1
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?::: Downloaded on - 19/05/2018 18:53:18 :::HCHP 2
2. Allegedly, the landlord has raised construction, which .
is unauthorised and also the land belongs to the State. The fact of the matter is that the writ petitioner, as tenant, has been occupying part of the built up structure since last 29 years. On 27.04.2018, we passed an interim order.
3. Today, Shri Arvind Sharma, learned counsel states that till and so long the writ petitioner is not disturbed and is allowed to occupy the premises either by the landlord or by the State, in whom the property now vests, it shall continue to occupy the premises and pay the amount as rent, in terms of the rent deed to the State.
4. We are also informed that the landlord has independently filed a writ petition being CWP No. 944 of 2018, titled as Guman Singh and others Vs. State of H.P. and others, wherein interim protection stands granted in favour of the landlord.
5. Any which way, we are of the considered view that the amount of rent should be paid to the State and eventually if the landlord succeeds in the writ petition, the said amount can be directed to be refunded to him. Equally it shall be open for the bank, if they so choose, to shift the Branch to an alternate premises, if they so desire. The rent in question be deposited with Tehsildar, Norhadharrespondent No.3.
::: Downloaded on - 19/05/2018 18:53:18 :::HCHP 36. We further clarify that the present order is being .
passed considering the public interest involved in the present matter, as the bank has been functioning in the premises in question for the last 29 ears.
With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed of, so also pending applications, if any.
(Sanjay Karol)
r Acting Chief Justice
(Ajay Mohan Goel)
Judge
May 18, 2018
(bhupender/guleria)
::: Downloaded on - 19/05/2018 18:53:18 :::HCHP