Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13048 (JHR)

AJAY PRASAD RAM v. CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI

WPC/2364/2024 · 2025-01-02

Rajesh Shankar

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 2364 of 2024 --- Ajay Prasad Ram son of Late Gobardhan Ram, resident of Village – Balbadda, P.O. & P.S.- Balbadda, District- Godda … … Petitioner Versus 1. The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 2. The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Godda 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Mahagama, District- Godda 5. The Block Development Officer, Meharma, District- Godda 6. The Panchayat Secretary, Balbadda Gram Panchayat, Godda 7. Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat, Balbadda, District- Godda 8. Mukund Ram son of Late Shivnarayan Ram 9. Shankar Ram son of Late Shivnarayan Ram Respondent nos. 8 & 9 are residents of Village, P.O. & P.S.- Balbadda, District-Godda 10. Bimal Prasad Ram son of Late Pali Prasad Ram, President, Beneficiary Committee, Gram Panchayat, Balbadda, Godda 11. Babita Devi wife of Rantu Kumar, Secretary, Beneficiary Committee, Gram Panchayat, Balbadda, Godda 12. Sudha Devi wife of Arvind Kumar 13. Arvind Kumar son of Vibhooti Ram 14. Santu Kumar son of Bimal Prasad Ram 15. Shankar Prasad Ram son of Late Shiv Narayan Ram 16. Rantu Kumar son of Bimal Prasad Ram Respondent nos. 12 to 16 are Members, Beneficiary Committee, Gram Panchayat, Balbadda, District - Godda …. … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner : M/s. Gopal K. Sinha & Chanchal Chhaya, Advocates For the Resp.- State : Mr. Nawal Kishor Pandey, A.C. to S.C. (L&C)-I Order No. 04 Dated: 02.01.2025 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent nos. 5 to 7 to remove the illegal construction of drainage from the petitioner’s land appertaining to Kheshra No. 379/188, Mouza- Balbadda, Circle – Meharama, Thana No. 355, Zamabandi No. 3/9, District- Godda measuring an area of 08 decimals as, according to the petitioner, the 2 W.P.(C) No. 2364 of 2024 existing ditch situated at his land has been covered without his permission and a P.C.C. road has illegally been constructed over the same for benefitting the respondent nos. 8 and 9. Further prayer has been made for restraining the respondent nos. 8 and 9 from opening their drainage into the drainage of the petitioner made over his aforesaid land. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The petitioner has stated in the writ petition that subsequent to filing of his representations, he received notice as contained in memo no. 1683 dated 27.07.2023 (Annexure-5 to the present writ petition) issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Mahagama (the respondent no. 4) directing him to appear on 05.08.2023 with evidence regarding his claim of misuse of government money in construction of drainage “from the house of Mukund Ram to the house of Jyotish Ram in village Balbadda” under Scheme No. 06/2021-22 as well as construction of P.C.C. road “from the house of Shankar Ram to the Main Road in village Balbadda” under Scheme No. 09/2021-22. According to the petitioner, he thereafter appeared before the respondent no. 4 and filed a detailed petition on 08.08.2023 annexing the relevant documents suggesting the misuse of government money and illegality committed by the respondent nos. 5 to 7 in connivance with the private respondents i.e,. the respondent nos. 8 and 9. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proceeding initiated by the respondent no. 4 is still pending and 3 W.P.(C) No. 2364 of 2024 under the said circumstance, the petitioner has been compelled to prefer the present writ petition. 5. Mr. Nawal Kishore Pandey, learned A.C. to S.C. (L&C)-I appearing on behalf of the State respondents, submits that if the proceeding initiated by the respondent no. 4 in terms with the notice as contained in memo no. 1683 dated 27.07.2023 is still pending, the same shall be disposed of in accordance with law without further delay. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of issue raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition, the respondent no. 4 is directed to conclude the proceeding initiated vide notice as contained in memo no. 1683 dated 27.07.2023 (if not already disposed of) in accordance with law after providing due opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties within two (02) months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 7. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Ritesh/