Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 27259 (JHR)

M/S SNEHA ENTERPRISES THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR DINESH AGARWAL v. ADITYAPUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THROUGH ITS ADMINISTRATOR (BAZAR DIVISION)

WPC/6378/2024 · 2025-01-23

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.6378 of 2024 ----- M/s. Sneha Enterprises, through its Proprietor, Dinesh Agarwal, S/o Devi Sahay Agarwal, resident of 32 Bhatia Basti, Mandir Path, Kadma, Jamshedpur. .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. Adityapur Municipal Corporation, through its Administrator (Bazar Division), Kalyanpuri, Adityapur Industrial Area, Adityapur, District Saraikella-Kharsawan. 2. Additional Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Adityapur, District Saraikella-Kharsawan. .......... Respondents. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Pd. Gupta, Advocate For the Respondents: None ----- Order No.03 Date: 23.01.2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to refund Rs.14,49,850/- to the petitioner, which was deposited by it in terms with the agreement dated 29/30th June, 2022 entered between the petitioner and the respondent no.2 for collecting rent from Gamhariya Market, however, the vendors/ shopkeepers of the said market refused to pay rent to the petitioner to be collected on behalf of Adityapur Municipal Corporation on the pretext of lack of basic amenities such as water supply, drainage, sanitation, washroom etc. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondents to defreeze the bank account of the petitioner which has been freezed on the direction of the respondents. 2. No one appears on behalf of the respondents. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of prayer made in the writ petition, this Court is of the view that an appropriate decision on the present issue should be taken by the respondent no.1 at the first instance. Hence, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no.1. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no.1 after providing an opportunity of hearing to the representative of the petitioner shall take an appropriate informed decision in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of filing of the representation. 4. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Sanjay/ -2- W.P.(C) No.6378 of 2024