Chitto Mallick Alias Chittaranjan Malick v. The Deputy Commissioner And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR *** WPA/916/2023 Chitto Mallick Alias Chittoranjan Mallick Vs.
The Deputy Commissioner and others Mr. Ananda Halder ... for the petitioner Mr.Shatardu Chakraborty Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi ... for the respondent nos.1&3 Mr.Lokesh Chezian.N.
... for the respondent no.4 September 25, 2023 [SR] Item No.15 Alleging inaction on the part of the police Administration in not providing an adequate support and/or assistance in carrying out the construction under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMJY), the instant writ petition is filed. It is stated in the writ petition that the survey no.137/2 measuring 50 sq.mtrs situated at Ram Nagar Village, Neil Island (Shaheed Dweep), under Port Blair Tehsil, District of South Andaman was allotted under the aforesaid scheme and a partial disbursement has also been made by the respondent no.2 but the construction could not be undertaken though the requisite materials have been stacked and/or purchased by the petitioner, because of the resistance having offered by the private respondent.
In course of hearing it has been brought to the notice of this Court that the Title Suit No.4 of 2018 instituted by the writ petitioner before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)-I at Port Blair is pending and a temporary injunction has been granted in the form of status quo to maintain in respect of the suit property.
The suit property is described in the schedule appended to the plaint which depicts the entire land comprised in survey no.137 having one hectare situated in the said village. Obviously the moment the Court has passed an order of temporary injunction directing the parties to maintain status quo with regard to the suit property such order of status quo has to be understood and considered in the perspective of the reliefs claimed in the plaint as well as in the application for temporary injunction.
At the very outset, it is to be recorded that the Court should refrain from passing of an order of status quo, when the possession appears to be in dispute without ascertaining who is in possession thereof. The order of status quo being ambiguous is capable of being abused and/or misused at the behest of an unscrupulous litigant and therefore, the Court should be slow and circumspect in passing such blanket order.
Be that as it may, since status quo was extended in respect of the entire suit property and it is a specific case of the petitioner that the survey no.137/2 is segregated from the larger survey no.137, therefore, the order of status quo have some impact in respect of the segregated portion as well.
Precisely for such reason, the petitioner has approached the Civil Court with a substantive application so that the money advanced under the said scheme is fully utilized.
The said application is pending and has not been disposed of as yet.
In view of the above, since the petitioner has approached the Civil Court because of the interdict in the form of status quo in respect of the suit property passed
much prior to the segregation of the land allotted to the petitioner under the aforesaid scheme, therefore, this court should not exercise the discretion vested upon it. The justice would subserved if the application filed by the petitioner before the Civil Court is decided with alacrity. This Court therefore directs the Civil Court to dispose of the said application within a fortnight from the date of communication of this order as it has been informed by the respondent counsel that the opposition to the said application had already been filed. In order to adhere the time limit given herein above, the learned Judge, if circumstances so warrant, shall pre-pone the date in presence of the parties or their respective counsel. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
Urgent Photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties subject to compliance with requisite formalities.
( Harish Tandon, J. )