Jharkhand High Court
Bidya Bhushan Koiri vs The Deputy General Manager ... on 1 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (C) No.4079 of 2017
-----
Bidya Bhushan Koiri .......... Petitioner.
-Versus-
1. The Deputy General Manager (Security), Steel Authority of India
Limited, Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro.
2. Assistant Manager (TA-Land), Steel Authority of India Limited,
Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro.
3. The Town Administrator, Steel Authority of India Limited, Bokaro
Steel Plant, Bokaro.
4. The Town Administrator, Electrical Maintenance, Bokaro Steel
Plant, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro.
5. The Sr. Land & Estate Officer, Town Administration Department,
Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro.
.......... Respondents.
-----
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Vijay Kant Dubey, Advocate
-----
Order No.06 Date: 01.07.2021
1. This case is taken up through video conferencing.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction
upon the respondents to extend the period of lease of the plot,
measuring an area of 10 meters x 15 meters= 150 sq. meters,
planning Dag No.1666008, situated at Lakrakhanda, Bokaro Steel City,
Bokaro, pertaining to Khata no.36, Mauja Punrua, Thana Chas no.9,
Sub Division Baghmara, District Bokaro, in the name of the petitioner,
which was earlier allotted in favour of his father- Jethu Prasad Koiri
(since deceased). Further prayer has been made for issuance of
direction upon the respondents to supply electricity in the premises of
the petitioner or to provide another place to the petitioner within the
town area of Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro to regularize his business of
flour mill.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid
land was allotted in favour of the petitioner's father in the year 1974
through an indenture of lease dated 14th September, 1974 for five
years. The petitioner's father started running a flour mill over the said
plot/land, lease of which was further renewed up to 9th September,
2007 by the Town Administrator, Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro Steel City,
Bokaro. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, it was the
duty and responsibility of the Town Administration Division, Bokaro
Steel Plant, Bokaro Steel City to supply electricity in the said premises
on payment of electricity bills raised by them for consumption of
electricity. However, in the month of August, 1999, the power
transformer, installed near High School, Lakarkhanda, from where the
said premises used to obtain electricity, got burnt and in spite of
repeated complaints the same was neither replaced nor repaired.
Under the said situation, the electrical connection in the said premises
remained discontinued since August, 1999, which forced the
petitioner/his father to close his business of flour mill. Learned counsel
for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is ready to make
payment of electricity dues standing against the premises in question.
4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents,
stating inter alia that the lessee of the premises in question requested
for restoration of electricity on 25th February, 2000 in response to
which vide letter dated 18th May, 2000, he was asked to clear the dues
of electricity bills for restoration of power supply, which returned
undelivered. On inspection of the premises on 17th May, 2001 it was
found that no business was being run over the said plot and there was
encroachment by the lessee on the rear side of the plot. The
respondents in their counter affidavit have also referred the judgment
dated 17th February, 2006 passed by the District Consumer Forum,
Bokaro, whereby the claim of the petitioner with regard to restoration
of electricity, shifting of flour mill and payment of compensation of
Rs.2.00 lacs was rejected. It has, however, been stated in paragraph
no.16 of the counter affidavit that the respondents are ready to
redress the grievance of the lessee within the ambit of the rules and
policies of the Company as well as keeping in view the commercial
viability.
5. Though the District Consumer Forum, Bokaro has already
passed an order with regard to restoration of electricity, shifting of
flour mill and payment of compensation, yet keeping in view the
statements made in paragraph no.16 of the counter affidavit to the
effect that the respondents are ready to redress the grievance of the
lessee/petitioner within the ambit of rules and policies of the Company
as well as in the light of the commercial viability of flour mills in the
area in question and that several years have since passed after
passing of the judgment/order dated 17th February, 2006 by the
District Consumer Forum, Bokaro, the petitioner is given liberty to
prefer a fresh representation before the respondent no.3, requesting
inter alia for grant/extension of the period of lease of the premises in
question so as to enable him to run flour mill as well as for grant of
restoration of electricity/fresh electric connection in the said premises
on payment of existing dues. On receipt of the said representation,
the respondent no.3 after providing due opportunity of hearing to the
petitioner or his representative shall take an appropriate informed
decision in accordance with law within a period of two months from
the date of receipt of the representation.
6. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with the aforesaid
liberty and direction.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Sanjay/
