Adarsh Divya Vikas v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8748 of 2016 =========================================================== Adarsh Divya Vikas, a Society Registered under Society Registration Act, Society, having its office at 1/50 Vivekanand Marg, Boring Road, Patna through its Secretary, Gyanesh Kumar, S/o Sri Birendra Kumar Mishra, Resident of 1/50, Vivekanand Marg, Boring Road, Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Women Development Corporation, 2nd Floor, Indira Bhawan, R.C. Singh Path, Bailey Road, Patna through its Managing Director.

3. The Administrative Officer, Women Development Corporation, 2nd Floor, Indira Bhawan, R.K. Singh Path, Bailey Road, Patna.

4. The Senior Deputy Collector, District- Patna.

5. The Deputy Commissioner of Police Sadar, District- Patna.

6. The District Project Manager/Project Director, Women Development Corporation, Patna, Bihar.

7. The State Programme Manager, Women Development Corporation, Bihar, Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Mohan Mishra For the Respondent/s : Mr. Alok Ranjan, AC to GA13 For Respondent Nos.2,3,6 & 7: Mr. Binod Kumar =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 28-06-2016 Heard the parties.

By the order impugned dated 31.3.2016 and for the reasons assigned in the order the Managing Director, Women Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') has taken a decision to shift the working women hostel from the private premises rented out by the petitioner to the Training Centre of 'the Corporation'.

While the said decision has been taken by the Managing

Patna High Court CWJC No.8748 of 2016 dt.28-06-2016 Director of 'the Corporation' in view of the default noted in the order itself, it is the argument of Mr. Krishna Mohan Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the fault lay with 'Corporation'.

Be that as it may, in my opinion, the prerogative lies with 'the Corporation' to continue its hostels in a particular premise or not and if a decision has been taken by the Managing Director to shift such hostel to the training centre of 'the Corporation', such decision cannot be interfered with for there is nothing arbitrary in the decision which accompanies acceptable reasons. Whatsoever be the contractual dispute in between the petitioner and 'the Corporation', the petitioner will be at liberty to take the recourse to the civil law remedy that may be available to it in law.

No cause for indulgence is made out and the writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

(Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/- NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 01-07-2016 Transmission Date