Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 872 (JHR)

Rustam Ali v. State Of Jharkhand

2003-07-22

P.K.BALASUBRAMANYAN, R.K.MERATHIA

body2003
ORDER 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the Ranchi Regional Development Authority and counsel for the Ranchi Municipal Corporation. 2. The grievance, in this writ petition, filed in public interest, relates to the developments and needs of a particular area of the Ranchi Town. According to the petitioner, various schemes can be taken up to improve the facilities available in that area. It was alleged that Ranchi Regional Development Authority was not taking up and completing various projects that have been proposed for the benefits of this area. A counter affidavit and an additional counter affidavit have been filed by the Ranchi Regional Development Authority submitting that out of the various works, six items of works were entrusted to the Ranchi Regional Development Authority has completed all those works. Of course, in a further rejoinder the petitioner has submitted that one of the works has not been fully completed. If that be so, we have no doubt that the Ranchi Regional Development Authority will complete that work also as expeditiously as possible. But, as we have noticed, the stand of the Ranchi Regional Development Authority is that that work has also been completed. Therefore, there is no occasion for issuing any further direction to the Ranchi Regional Development Authority regarding the works that have been entrusted to it. 3. As far as Ranchi Municipal Corporation is concerned, in its counter affidavit in paragraph 16, the Corporation has submitted that all kinds of developmental activities are required for the whole of Ranchi Town, but, the Municipal Corporation is not in a position to undertake those works all at once since it does not have adequate funds it is submitted that the schemes are undertaken on priority basis. It is further submitted that if the Ranchi Municipal Corporation gets sufficient funds it will consider the schemes suggested by the petitioner in the writ petition concerning the area in question. In the light of this position adopted by the Municipal Corporation, we are not satisfied that any further formal directions are called for. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to argue that the funds to be used at the discretion of the Member of parliament and the Member of the State Legislative Assembly could be utilized for the purpose of improvement of the area in question. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to argue that the funds to be used at the discretion of the Member of parliament and the Member of the State Legislative Assembly could be utilized for the purpose of improvement of the area in question. The stand of the Ranchi Regional Development Authority and Municipal Corporation is that they have not received any contribution from the funds of the Member of Parliament or the Member of the Legislative Assembly. Though the petitioner originally impleaded the Member of Parliament and the Member of Legislative Assembly, they were subsequently removed from the party array. Therefore, there is no question of issuing any direction to those representatives of the people in this case even assuming that this Court can control the spending of the funds made available to them in their capacity as Members of the Parliament or Legislative Assembly. That part of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner are, therefore, rejected. 5. The development of a town has to be uniform and cannot be concentrated on any particular area or the area in question. The writ petition filed by the petitioner relates only to one of the many areas of the town. We do not think that it is proper to direct the authorities to concentrate on their developmental activities in any particular area of a town like Ranchi, which is now the capital city. The development has to be uniform and it should be an over all development of the city. In that view of the matter, we are satisfied, specification in the context of the works already undertaken, that there is no need to issue any further direction, as sought for the petitioner except, to take note of the stand of the Municipal Corporation that as and when funds are made available, the schemes for improving the town will be taken up on priority basis and while doing so, the suggestions made by the petitioner will be kept in mind. 6. It appears to us that it is for the Municipal Corporation to find funds for the development of the town by collecting all the taxes due to it from the traders, citizens and occupants of the town. The Municipal Corporation cannot be slack in the matter of collecting revenue. The collection of revenue is intended for taking up and carrying on developmental activities of the town. The Municipal Corporation cannot be slack in the matter of collecting revenue. The collection of revenue is intended for taking up and carrying on developmental activities of the town. We, therefore, direct the Municipal Corporation to undertake a tax collection drive and recover whatever taxes and cesses and other dues that may be outstanding, by recourse to the relevant provisions of the Municipal Corporation Act or any other allied laws. It is also its duty to ensure that collections of current taxes due are also made promptly and in time. Therefore, the Municipal corporation is directed to take all necessary steps in that regard. 7. This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions and observations. Petition disposed off.