Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
‐ vs ‐ on 26 February, 2019
Author: Shampa Sarkar
Bench: Shampa Sarkar
1
26.02.2019
279 (C.L.)
p.d.
W.P. No.23915 (W) of 2017
Jhabu Bibi
‐Vs‐
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Parvej Anam,
Mr. Sandip Dinda .... For the petitioner.
None appears on behalf of the State respondents even on the second call.
The allegation of the petitioner is that her husband applied under the "Pradhan Mantri Awaas Yojana"(hereinafter referred to as the 'PMAY') scheme for monetary benefit under the said scheme in order to construct a house. After the demise of the petitioner's husband, the petitioner informed the authorities and prayed for the same benefit, as in place of her husband under the "PMAY"‐(G). The name of the husband of the petitioner appeared in the list prepared by the Additional Executive Officer, Purulia Zilla Parishad, bearing Memo. No.583(20)/PLP dated 28.06.2016.
It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the petitioner that the name of the husband of the petitioner was enlisted under the Socio‐Economic Caste Census List as EB‐0258 with family serial No.0066. In the Minority Category Beneficiaries List prepared by the Jhalda‐Dadra Gram Panchayat, the name of the petitioner's husband was at serial No.54. The name of her husband was also in the Auto Generated 2 Priority List for Jhalda‐Dadra Gram Panchayat. The petitioner's husband died on November 15, 2014 and she claimed such benefit, as was earlier prayed for by her husband.
The petitioner has made two representations to the Block Development Officer, Jhalda‐1 Development Block on February 17, 2017 and also on March 1, 2017 for extending the appropriate relief under the said "PMAY" Scheme and although she drew the attention of the said authority that many persons have been given the said benefit by violating the provisions under the said Scheme, the said authority, namely, the Block Development Officer, Jhalda‐1 Development Block, have not responded to such representations made by her.
Under such circumstances, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction upon the respondent No.4 to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representations annexed to this writ petition, within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order by passing a reasoned order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as also other concerned parties and the reasoned decision taken thereof, should be communicated to all the parties, including the petitioner, within a week thereafter.
It is needless to mention that while taking such reasoned decision, the said respondent authority shall enquire into the allegation made by the petitioner to the effect that many persons have been given the benefit under the said Scheme contrary 3 to the provisions under the Scheme and by unlawful. If the said authority further comes to a finding that the petitioner's husband was entitled to the said benefit, as per the rules and the lists prepared and under the said Scheme, then the said authority shall extend the same benefit to such persons who have a right to the same as an heir of the deceased as per the provisions of the scheme and in accordance with law.
There will, however, be no order as to costs.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties at an early date.
( Shampa Sarkar, J. )