Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ankur Kumar Singh vs Union Of India on 16 December, 2016
:: 1 ::
Writ Petition No.18762/2016
(Ankur Kumar Singh vs Union of India)
16.12.2016
Shri Nilesh Kotecha, learned counsel for petitioner.
Shri Greeshm Jain, learned counsel for respondent No.2 to 4.
Shri Vikram Johri, Panel Lawyer for respondent No.5-State. None for respondent No.1.
Heard.
Petitioner, a Block Coordinator/S.B.M. Janpad Panchayat Kotma District Anuppur on the recommendation of Collector Anuppur was allotted a Quarter No.B/14 Civil Lines Kotma vide order No.SECL:APM:JK:Qrtrs:15/1116 Dated 11.9.2015 with the approval of General Manager, Jamuna Kotma Area. The quarter belongs to South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. and is admittedly not in the pool of State of M.P. nor of the Collector, Anuppur. It is also not in dispute that the quarter in question was allotted to petitioner's father who was an employee of the SECL as Chief Store Keeper and has since retired.
As the allotment was subject to terms and conditions as per extant rules and on payment of necessary rent as per provisions, some dispute arose regarding non-payment of rent resulting in the arrears of rent, which led the Authorities of respondent-SECL to issue impugned communication dated 1.9.2016 that if the rent and necessary maintenance charges are not paid, action would be taken for recovery and for vacating the premises.
On notice being issued to the respondents, response is filed. It is, however, fairly submitted on behalf of respondent-SECL that :: 2 ::
Writ Petition No.18762/2016(Ankur Kumar Singh vs Union of India) the petitioner has cleared all the due towards rent and maintenance charges. It is, however, contended that since the quarter is not of the state pool but of the SECL and that the quarter is required to be allotted to the employees of SECL, the petitioner may be called upon to hand over the vacant possession.
Responding to the said submission, it is contended on behalf of the petitioner that he may be given some time to vacate the premises.
In view of these submissions, the petition is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner shall vacate the premises and hand over the vacant possession thereof on or before 31.5.2017 and till then, shall continue to abide by the terms and conditions on which the quarter is allotted. In case petitioner fails in abiding by this order, respondents would be at liberty to initiate contempt proceedings.
Petition is disposed of finally in above terms. No costs. C.C. as per rules.
(Sanjay Yadav)
vinod JUDGE