Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 800 (JHR)

Arun Kumar v. State of Jharkhand

2022-07-06

RAJESH SHANKAR

body2022
JUDGMENT : Since the petitioner has filed supplementary affidavit dated 24.07.2021 for removing the defect no. 5 pointed out by the office, the said defect is ignored. 2. So far as rest of the defects are concerned, the same are also ignored at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 18.01.2021 (Anneuxre-10 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent no. 2- the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi in JAR Appeal No. 14 of 2018 whereby the order dated 07.02.2018 passed by the Municipal Commissioner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi (the respondent no. 3) in JA/Reg. Case No. 06 of 2017 has been modified. 4. On perusal of impugned order dated 18.01.2021 passed by the respondent no. 2 in J.A.R. Appeal No. 14 of 2018, it appears that while disposing of the said appeal, the respondent no. 4 (the promoter in question) has been directed to complete the flat in question within six months from the date of the order if the allottee (the petitioner herein) gives an undertaking to make entire payment to the promoter as per the agreement and on completion of the flat in question, the competent authority has been directed to issue completion certificate. All the parties have further been directed to abide by the provisions of the Jharkhand Apartment (Flat) Ownership Act, 2011. Accordingly, the order dated 07.04.2018 passed by the original authority i.e. the respondent no. 3 in JA/Reg. Case No. 06 of 2017 has been modified to the said extent. 5. I find that the appellate authority i.e. the respondent no. 2, after considering entire aspect of the matter, has passed impugned order dated 18.01.2021 keeping in mind the interest of all the contesting parties. Hence, no interference is warranted against the said order. 6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the promoter- the respondent no. 4 is not complying the order dated 18.01.2021 passed by the respondent no. 2 in J.A.R. Appeal No. 14 of 2018. 7. If the respondent no. 4- the promoter in question is not complying the order of the appellate authority, the petitioner is at liberty to take appropriate recourse against the same as provided under law. 8. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation.