Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1609 (JHR)

Shakuntala Singh v. Jharkhand State Housing Board

2016-11-28

APARESH KUMAR SINGH

body2016
ORDER : Heard counsel for the petitioner and respondent-Board. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the demand contained in letter no. 05/AA 459/2011/2738/AA dated 23rd December, 2011 (Annexure-2) issued by the Revenue Officer, Jharkhand State Housing Board whereunder further demand of Rs.12,14,846/- till 29th February, 2011 has been raised against the petitioner. Petitioner contends that pursuant to the allotment letter dated 26th November 1983 bearing no. 2333 she was allotted Middle Income Group House No.169 (Annexure-1) on deposit of Rs.9,350/- as security deposit and Rs.78,500/- as price of the house, balance of Rs.62,800/- to be paid on 120 monthly instalments. Since the house was in semi-construction stage, the Board could not enter into the agreement with the allottees and hand over possession of the house. Agreement was entered on 21st December 1988 on Hire Purchase basis. Petitioner was directed to deposit 120 monthly instalments from January, 1989 onwards but due to poor financial conditions she could not make the same. Petitioner, however, approached the Board to make payment in a consolidated manner for execution of the final deed of conveyance transferring the ownership on perpetual lease basis. The impugned letter has, however, come as a surprise. The price of the house has been calculated from the date of allotment till the date of agreement capitalizing the value of instalment not paid in time. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant issue has earlier crossed the attention of this Court in W.P.(C) No.1127/2010, judgment of which was upheld in L.P.A. No.346/2011. It is submitted that taking cue therefrom, other writ petitions i.e. W.P.(C) No.2265 of 2007 and W.P.(C) No.6225 of 2015 have been disposed of by relegating the petitioner to pursue his grievance before the competent authority/the Revenue Officer, Jharkhand State Housing Board by way of a representation in the light of the decision of the Jharkhand Housing Board taken in its 40th meeting held on 7th April, 2015 and the letter bearing memo no.313 dated 9th March, 2015. The instant writ petition may also be disposed of in similar light. 4. Counsel for the respondent-Board submits that the matter can also be disposed of in the light of the direction issued in the cases referred to herein above. 5. The instant writ petition may also be disposed of in similar light. 4. Counsel for the respondent-Board submits that the matter can also be disposed of in the light of the direction issued in the cases referred to herein above. 5. The relevant extracts of the judgment dated 09.08.2016 passed in W.P.(C) No.6225 of 2015 are being quoted herein below as well:- “However, considering the fact that Respondent Housing Board has in its resolution dated 7th April 2015 taken a decision to examine the question of outstanding demand raised upon the individual allotment orders and lease agreement in question on the issue of charging simple/compound interest in individual cases, this court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition without getting into merits of the matter at this stage by relegating the petitioner to pursue his grievance before the competent authority/Respondent No. 2 by way of a fresh representation duly supported with all necessary facts and documents including the judgment relied upon by him, within a period of two weeks from today. On receipt of such representation, the competent authority/Respondent No. 2 would consider the representation and take an informed decision in the matter in accordance with law and the resolution issued by the Respondent-Housing Board on the subject in question within a reasonable time preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Dependent upon such decision, if petitioner is required to deposit any outstanding amount, he would deposit the same thereafter within the time stipulated by the Respondent Housing Board. On such deposit, the Respondent Housing Board would proceed to execute the lease agreement with the petitioner/ eligible persons in accordance with law. The impugned demand would not stand in the way of Respondent Housing Board in taking fresh decision in the matter in view of what has been observed hereinabove. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly.” 6. Having considered the submissions of the parties, without observing any comments on the merits of the case, this writ petition stands disposed of in the same terms as above.