ORDER : 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the demand contained in letter dated 13.12.2006 (Annexure-7) issued by the Revenue Officer of the Respondent Board, asking him to pay the outstanding dues to the tune of Rs. 5,73,414/- as on 31.12.2006 and Rs. 5,76,381/- as on 31.01.2007 in respect of MIG Flat/House No. 7 towards the balance principal amount as well as interest thereupon. 3. Petitioner was allotted house in question through allotment letter at Annexure-1 dated 29.03.1979 and thereafter he entered into a hire purchase agreement with the Respondent Board on 05.05.1979 (Annexure-2). Petitioner was given possession of the house on 15.12.1980. Petitioner has detailed the payment made thereafter by way of Annexure-3. He made a prayer for execution of the lease deed on 24.10.1994. Petitioner also cleared the dues of Rs. 18,915/- raised on 19.11.1994 vide Annexure-5. Petitioner however received with surprise the impugned demand at Annexure-7 asking him to pay the balance principal dues along with interest. 4. Petitioner is aggrieved by the outstanding demand raised through the impugned Letter at Annexure-7 wherein the Respondents have capitalized the value of installment not paid in time and sought to recover it allegedly in an illegal and arbitrary manner. Counsel for the petitioner has referred to the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (C) No. 1127 of 2010 and 2011 (4) JLJR 235 in the case of Arun Kumar Sinha vs. Jharkhand State Housing Board and Others as also the judgment rendered by the learned Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 346 of 2011. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a decision has been taken by the Housing Board in its 48th meeting held on 7th April 2015 and such payment on the basis of compound interest has been modified and corrected. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment passed by this Court in W.P. (C) No. 2265 of 2007 in the case of Suresh Chandra versus The State of Jharkhand and others and analogous cases dated 27.07. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment passed by this Court in W.P. (C) No. 2265 of 2007 in the case of Suresh Chandra versus The State of Jharkhand and others and analogous cases dated 27.07. 2016 wherein taking note of the decision of Jharkhand Housing Board in its 48th meeting held on 7th April 2015 and the letter bearing memo No. 313 dated 9th March 2015, this court had disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the Housing Board to take an informed decision in the matter of individual petitioners within the stipulated time on the question of the outstanding demand raised against them. It is submitted that this writ petition may also be disposed of on similar lines to enable the petitioner to pursue his grievance before the competent authority/Revenue Office, Jharkhand State Housing Board in accordance with law. 6. Respondent Board had earlier filed counter affidavit in the matter, wherein stand has been taken that the petitioner is habitual defaulter. 7. 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 allotees and on entering of 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/Revenue Officer, Jharkhand State Housing Board 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/Revenue Officer 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. 8. Dependent upon such decision, if the 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. 9. 8. Dependent upon such decision, if the 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. 9. The impugned demand shall not stand in the way of Respondent Housing Board in taking fresh decision in the matter in view of what has been observed herein-above. 10. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly.