Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 193 (JHR)

Court on its own Motion v. State of Jharkhand

2012-02-06

APARESH KUMAR SINGH, PRAKASH TATIA

body2012
ORDER : Learned counsel for the CCL-BCCL submitted that it is true that in order dated 07th September, 2011, this Court has taken note of the encroachments over the dwelling units and the plots of land under unauthorized occupation of the public sector undertakings. So far as CCL is concerned, as on 31st December, 2011, there were 14078 dwelling units under unauthorized occupation, out of which against 10398 unauthorized occupants proceedings have initiated for eviction under the provisions of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 and in those 10398 complaints, against 4091 unauthorized occupants eviction orders have been passed and 919 quarters got vacated. The plots which were shown under the unauthorized occupation is 6960, out of which against 4315 complaints have been filed, wherein in 2210 number of cases eviction orders have been passed and 36 unauthorized occupants of plots have been evicted. 2. The action taken by the CCL remained unexplained as why the complaints against some of the encroachers have not been filed and less execution of order of eviction is also absolutely unsatisfactory. 3. For BCCL, it was reported that 18100 unauthorized occupants are occupying the dwelling units of the BCCL and 31223 plots are being occupied by the unauthorized occupants. Whereas as per BCCL, as on 20.01.2012, 25730 number of eviction cases have been filed against the unauthorized occupants and notices have been issued to 6877 unauthorized occupants wherein in 3950 cases eviction orders have been passed and 831 unauthorized occupants have been evicted after execution. 4. It is submitted that in BCCL there are 28 Estate Officers and in CCL there may be 13 Estate Officers. Learned counsel for the CCL-BCCL further submitted that the companies are going to formulate some policies for better utilization of their properties, which were/are in occupation of the unauthorized occupants and the properties which have been got vacated. 5. For this, it would be relevant to mention here that this Court has already observed that this Court is not monitoring the affairs of the companies and is only looking into the gross negligence committed by the companies in the matter of dealing with its properties as the funds of hundreds of crores of rupees have been spent for the benefit of unauthorized occupants by paying for their electricity and water charges etc. 6. 6. The progress report submitted by both the companies, CCL and BCCL, are absolutely unsatisfactory and indicates that the management of the companies are not serious in these matters and, therefore, we direct both the management of the companies to act promptly and see that all unauthorized occupants be removed from the premises of the companies by or before 31st March, 2012, subject to any order which may be passed in legal proceedings. 7. In case of any lapse on the part of the companies' management, this Court itself will try to fix responsibility on the officers who in spite of the order passed by this Court did not acted to implement the order of this Court in its true spirit. 8. Learned counsel for the SAIL and HEC submitted that two Interlocutory Applications being I.A. No. 385 of 2012 and 386 of 2012 have been filed by these companies wherein the companies have sought permission of this Court so as to certain decisions may be taken effectively to manage their own affairs including the matter dealing with the properties which have been got vacated from the authorized occupants. 9. Both these Interlocutory Applications, I.A. No. 385 of 2012 and 386 of 2012, are disposed of with the observation that this Court has already observed in the previous orders that this Public Interest Litigation is not interfering with the internal or otherwise management of the companies and this Court is only looking into the issues of unauthorized occupation in the plots and properties of the public sector undertakings and, therefore, the companies in their best judgment in their own right may take any decision with respect to management of affairs of their companies including managing their immovable properties, specifically the lands and the plots which they have got vacated from unauthorized occupants. However, for time being it will be worthwhile to mention here that this Court may examine that the companies in the garb of their right to deal with the companies properties and manage the affairs of the companies, some unauthorized occupants may not be obliged. It is necessary because of the past conduct of the companies where we found that 35,000/- unauthorized occupants have been obliged by the management of the companies. 10. It is necessary because of the past conduct of the companies where we found that 35,000/- unauthorized occupants have been obliged by the management of the companies. 10. Learned counsel for the SAIL, submitted that SAIL has instituted 2119 cases for eviction wherein in 1498 cases orders have been passed for eviction out of which against 386 unauthorized occupants proceedings have been dropped, who vacated the premises during proceedings and 1334 orders have been executed. Therefore, in total 1720 cases, the properties have been got vacated and now only 163 cases are pending. For lands, in 46 cases orders have been passed and 2357 units of plots have been made encroachment free, which compromises 100 acres of land. Thereafter, in 96 cases, orders have been passed covering 315 acres of land, for which a phase-wise programme has been given to the State for execution of the eviction order passed against the encroachers and this would be completed by May, 2012. 11. The figures given appears to be satisfactory and we hope that the rests of the plots and the lands would be got evicted from encroachers. 12. So far HEC is concerned, according to learned counsel for the HEC substantially number of the dwelling units have been taken over by the HEC from the encroachers and out of 1006 dwelling units only 21 dwelling units are in occupation of the encroachers, against whom the proceeding will be completed soon. It is further submitted that in the year 2012, 30 more cases have been instituted for eviction and these will also be made clear from encroachment. 13. We need not to repeat all the order, which have been passed by this Court, except giving the chart herein below: Sl. No. 1. Name of the PSU/Case No. 2. No. of dwelling units under unauthorized occupation 3. No. of plots of land under unauthorized occupation 4. Amount of expenditure incurred on the electricity and water consumed by the unauthorized occupants 5. Amount of expenditure incurred on the maintenance of dwelling units unauthorizedly occupied. 1. CCL/ PE2 15317 6960 32,14,97,250/- 93,58,378/- (A)/2011- plots (during last (during last AHD-R year) ten years) 2. HEC/PE3 243 472.12 7,18,365/- Nil (A)/2011- acres (during last AHD-R ten years) 3. BSL/PE4 162 2086.39 3,37,376/- Nil (A)/2011- acres (during last AHD-R four months) 4. BCCL/PE5 18100 31223 1,09,28,01,431/- Nil (A)/2011- plots (during last AHD-R ten years) 14. 1. CCL/ PE2 15317 6960 32,14,97,250/- 93,58,378/- (A)/2011- plots (during last (during last AHD-R year) ten years) 2. HEC/PE3 243 472.12 7,18,365/- Nil (A)/2011- acres (during last AHD-R ten years) 3. BSL/PE4 162 2086.39 3,37,376/- Nil (A)/2011- acres (during last AHD-R four months) 4. BCCL/PE5 18100 31223 1,09,28,01,431/- Nil (A)/2011- plots (during last AHD-R ten years) 14. This Court directed these companies to show whether these companies are under the scanner of the Comptroller & Auditor General of India or not. The companies stated that they are under the scanner of Comptroller & Auditor General of India. Not only this but the auditors from Comptroller & Auditor General of India or by Union of India are posted in the premises of the companies itself and some of the officers, who may be from the Comptroller & Auditor General of India or may be appointed by the Department of Finance, Government of India and Director, Commercial Audit is posted at CCL is one of the example of it. 15. Therefore, it was in the knowledge of the officers of the Union of India that the properties of four companies, namely, Central Coalfields Ltd., Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Bokaro Steel Limited and Heavy Engineering Corporation, were occupied by more than 35,000 encroachers and in their knowledge funds of hundreds of crores of rupees have been paid against the electricity charges and water charges and we may observe here that water charges must have been negligible as compared with electricity charges. Therefore, we can presume that these encroachers were given great luxury facilities in the bungalows and quarters of these four public sector units and that too when the high officers of the Union of India, especially from the Comptroller & Auditor General of India, were appointed and posted within the premises of the companies. We have already sent information to all the Ministries concerned in such a grave matter. Therefore, we direct Md. We have already sent information to all the Ministries concerned in such a grave matter. Therefore, we direct Md. Mokhtar khan, learned counsel for the Union of India to accept notice on behalf of Union of India and particularly for Comptroller & Auditor General of India so that the Comptroller & Auditor General of India may assist this Court in finding out who are the real culprits, whether it was only the persons of lower rank or it was done with collusion of high officials or with the direct support of the persons who were appointed by the Comptroller & Auditor General of India or by Union of India as Vigilance Officers in substance to look into the financial affairs of the public sector companies. 16. Learned counsel for the companies submitted that there are certain audit paras also with regard to expenditure incurred for unauthorized occupants. 17. If it is so, then it is a matter of great concern because of the simple reason that the unauthorized occupants occupied these premises and loss of thousands of crores of rupees were in the knowledge of such auditors, who made report, may be several times, but for the purpose best known to these persons themselves and that authorities who were supposed to take action not only in time but even after passing of the orders passed by this Court and giving copies of earlier orders to the Ministries, no action was taken against any of the officers. We may reiterate that for the knowledge of the above Ministries; Ministry of Coal, Ministry of Heavy Industries and Ministry of Steel, that this Public Interest Litigation was filed and then only such grave illegalities came to the notice and probably this may be the one of the biggest scandal in India in the matter of dealing with not only public funds but immovable properties of the Government undertaking companies. 18. In view of the above, learned counsel for the Union of India may seek instruction from the above mentioned Ministries as well as from the Comptroller & Auditor General of India. 19. The progress report with respect to removal of encroachment may be submitted by the companies again on 29.02.2012. 18. In view of the above, learned counsel for the Union of India may seek instruction from the above mentioned Ministries as well as from the Comptroller & Auditor General of India. 19. The progress report with respect to removal of encroachment may be submitted by the companies again on 29.02.2012. In the meanwhile, the Union of India as well as the Comptroller & Auditor General of India may respond to this order and explain the reasons for not taking action against their officers not only at the time of commission of wrong by the encroachers but they may explain why the action was not taken, after receipt of the copies of the order of this Court. 20. The State Government is directed to provide full help to the companies as the State is bound to protect the public properties, which may be 'Government of India Undertakings'. 21. Put up this case on 29.02.2012. Petition disposed of.