← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/21264/2011allowed

Bhola Nath @ Bhola Nath Gupta v. The Biharshariff Municipal Cor

2016-04-25Mr. Justice Vikash Jain3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21264 of 2011 ======================================================== Bhola Nath @ Bhola Nath Gupta S/O Late Muneshwar Sao Resident of Mohalla- Alamganj, P.O- Biharsharif, P.S- Lahiri, District- Nalanda. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Biharsharif Municipal Corporation, Nalanda at Biharsharif.

2. The Nagar Ayutk-Cum-Special Officer of Nagar Nigam, Biharsharif.

3. The Mayor, Biharsharif Nagar Nigam, Nalanda. .... .... Respondents ======================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Bhola Prasad, Advocate Mr. Amar Nath Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Gyan Prakash Ojha, Advocate ======================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 25-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the decision dated 27.09.2011 (Annexure-6) communicated to the petitioner vide Memo No. 2509 dated 11.10.2011 (Annexure-7) under the signature of the Respondent Nagar Ayukt, Municipal Commissioner of Biharsharif Municipal Corporation; for a direction to the respondents to act upon the agreement dated 10.09.2011 executed by the Respondents No. 2 and 3 with the petitioner; and for connected reliefs.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that pursuant to an agreement dated 10.09.2011 (Annexure-3) entered into between the parties pursuant to a decision of the Board dated 06.09.2011, the petitioner made the pre-requisite deposit of Rs. 20,00,000/- in terms of condition no. 3 of the said agreement prior to commencement of construction, and also incurred other expenses of about Rs. 1,00,000/- towards preparation of map and lay out. It is submitted that the impugned order dated 27.09.2011 has been passed unilaterally by the

Patna High Court CWJC No.21264 of 2011 dt.25-04-2016 respondents without so much as a show cause to the petitioner, thereby denying him even an opportunity of being heard in the matter. It is therefore, submitted that the decision of the respondents dated 27.09.2011 taken in its special meeting is wholly unsustainable.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents relies on the counter affidavit to oppose the writ petition, inter alia, stating that possession of the land has not been given to the petitioner and the deposit of Rs. 20,00,000/- has been made by the petitioner without any demand being made for the same.

5. Having heard the parties and on consideration of the materials on record, this Court finds merit in the writ petition. The agreement dated 10.09.2011 itself states that the same was entered into pursuant to a unanimous decision taken in the Board's meeting dated 06.09.2011 for the allotment of the land measuring 20 ft./100 ft. for the establishment of a small scale industry and an electronic shop by the petitioner. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner made the deposit of Rs. 20,00,000/- prior to the commencement of construction on the land. The stand of the respondents that no demand for such payment was made is contrary to condition no. 3 of the agreement, which itself required the petitioner to make such payment at any time prior to commencement of the construction.

The respondents are unable to satisfy this Court that any opportunity was granted to the petitioner for a hearing prior to the cancellation of the agreement. It is therefore, apparent that the right which had accrued to the petitioner has been deprived of his right under the agreement without any opportunity of being heard and thus the decision making process stands vitiated as being violative of the principles of natural justice.

6. In the above view of the matter, therefore, the decision taken by the Board in its special meeting dated 27.09.2011 along with the memo No. 2509 dated 11.10.2011 communicating such decision to the petitioner, is hereby quashed.

Patna High Court CWJC No.21264 of 2011 dt.25-04-2016

7. It is made clear that the respondents shall be at liberty to take a fresh decision in the matter in accordance with law and after the grant of reasonable opportunity to the petitioner of being heard in the matter.

8. The writ petition stands allowed.

(Vikash Jain, J) Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 06.05.2016 Transmission Date