Shashi Bhushan Singh vs Bihar State Housing Board And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 2421 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1904 of 2017
     ======================================================

Shashi Bhushan Singh, Son of Late Nandan Prasad Singh, resident of Mohalla- K/504, Hanuman Nagar, State Bank Road Near Ujwal Palace Apartment, P.S. - Kankarbagh, District- Patna (Bihar).

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. Bihar State Housing Board through its Managing Director, Mangles Road, Patna.

2. Housing State Officer, Bihar State Housing Board, Patna, Mangles Road, Patna.

3. The Executive Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board, Patna Division No. X, Kankarbagh, Patna.

4. BHU - Smapada Padadhikari, Bihar State Housing Board, Mangles Road, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Raj Nandan Prasad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 16-05-2023 Heard Mrs. Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi, learned

counsel representing the petitioner and Mr. Raj Nandan Prasad,

learned counsel for the Bihar State Housing Board.

2. Having heard the parties and considering the

materials available on record, prima facie, it appears that the

entire action of the respondent Bihar State Housing Board

(hereinafter referred to as the 'Board') is nothing but to nullify

the effect of the earlier order passed by this Court dated

30.11.2006 in C.W.J.C. No. 4408 of 2000 wherein the mother of

the petitioner had approached before this Court for possession

of the MIG plot no. V/684 and to execute the final transfer deed

in her favour, which was earlier allotted to her husband, late Patna High Court CWJC No.1904 of 2017 dt.16-05-2023

Nandan Prasad Singh. The learned Court having taken into

consideration the fact that the land, which was initially allotted

in favour of the petitioners' father, had been encroached by

some unscrupulous persons, as submitted by the respondents,

directed the petitioner either to accept the refund of the amount

with interest or to accept the alternative plot no. K/504, offered

by the Board. On the offer made by the Board, the mother of the

petitioner accepted the offer of the alternative plot and deposited

the entire amount against the allotted plot, bearing no. K/504

Lohianagar.

3. It would also be worth mentioning here that having

opted for purchasing the alternate plot, when request was made

to accept the rest of the due amount, the respondent Board came

out with letter dated 11.10.2007 directing for deposit of

enhanced amount of Rs.6,00,000/- against the plot. Mother of

the petitioner again compelled to approach this Court in

C.W.J.C. No. 15658 of 2007, which was disposed of with a

direction to approach before the Pricing Committee of the

Board. The Pricing Committee accepted the claim of the

petitioner and directed to deposit the rest of the amount as per

prescribed old rate.

4. It is the further case of the petitioner that after Patna High Court CWJC No.1904 of 2017 dt.16-05-2023

deposit of the entire amount pursuant to the observation made

by this Court, her mother submitted an application as contained

in Annexure-5 to the writ petition for registry of the said plot

(K/504 Lohianagar). Despite the deposit of the amount against

the plot no. K/504 and fee for registration, the registration of the

transfer deed has not been done and all of a sudden the Board

came out with an order, as contained in Annexure-6 to the writ

petition, which reveals that the Board came out with an order

that earlier decision taken in the 249 th meeting of the Board was

not valid and hence they have invalidated the decision taken in

the 249th meeting, allotting the plot No. K/504 in favour of

petitioner's mother.

5. The petitioner has left with no option, approached

this Court. It would be worth noticing that the mother of the

petitioner died in the year 1916.

6. This Court having found the decision taken in 249 th

meeting of the Board as patently illegal, vide its order dated

12.04.2023 directed the Managing Director of the Board to

resolve the dispute, in question and file counter affidavit.

7. A peculiar stand has been taken by the Board in its

counter affidavit wherein the authorities of the Board discussed

the matter and request has been made to the High Court to pass Patna High Court CWJC No.1904 of 2017 dt.16-05-2023

order, whereupon the matter would be placed before the Board

to pass an order in compliance of the order of this Court.

8. It is needless to observe that neither the order

passed by this Court dated 30.11.2006 in C.W.J.C. No. 4408 of

2000 has ever been challenged nor it has been modified till date

and in compliance of the aforenoted order of this Court an

alternative plot was allotted in favour of the mother of the

petitioner, which was accepted by her way back in the year 2007

itself, hence there is no question of withdrawing the earlier

decision taken by the Board in its meeting no. 249, almost after

about a decade effecting the right and entitlement of the

petitioner, behind his back.

9. This Court also finds substance in the submission

of the petitioner that entire amount against the plot No. K/504

had already been deposited way back in the year 2013 itself and

thereafter the fees for registration has also been deposited in the

year 2013 itself, but the respondents kept seated tight over the

matter and instead of registration of the transfer deed, they came

out with the impugned order, which in any view of the matter is

not justified and sustainable in law as well as on facts.

10. Accordingly, this Court has left with no option but

to quash the impugned orders dated 19.10.2016 issued by the Patna High Court CWJC No.1904 of 2017 dt.16-05-2023

respondent no.4, as also the letter dated 31.03.2015 issued by

the Secretary of the Board regarding cancellation of plot no.

K/504 Lohianagar and further directs the respondent no.1 to

ensure registration of the lease deed in favour of the petitioner,

who happens to be the son of late Madhuri Devi, in whose

favour the allotment was made.

11. It is needless to say that the entire process must be

completed within a period of two months from the date of

receipt/production of a copy of this order.

12. Accordingly, the present writ application stands

disposed of with the aforesaid directions and observations.

(Harish Kumar, J) uday/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          18.05.2023
Transmission Date