AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
I.A. No. 2882/2011
It is submitted by the applicant, Hazi Gulam Sarwar stating that his building has been seized on 18th February, 2011. Now the applicant has provided the parking space for 12 cars whereas as per the norms he is required to provide parking space only for 7 cars. The applicant has applied before the Ranchi Municipal Corporation for according sanction of his plan, for which he has deposited the requisite fee.
According to the Learned Counsel for the applicant, his application is not being processed because of pendency of this litigation.
Initially the Ranchi Municipal Corporation may consider the prayer of the applicant but shall not pass any order of sanction and the Corporation may submit its report with respect to the feasibility and legality of the request of the applicant with clear opinion whether it is a fit case for grant of approval so as to open the shops in the building of the applicant. Copy of such reasoned order may be supplied to the Amicus Curiae who may assist the Court for passing any order in I.A. No. 2882 of 2011.
The Ranchi Municipal Corporation is also directed to submit the status report and confirm whether the shops, which were sealed in pursuance of the order of this Court, are actually in sealed condition or have been opened.
The State has filed Counter affidavit on behalf of the Transport Commissioner on 12th October, 2011 stating therein that so far State Government is concerned, the State Government has agreed for having CNG pipelines installation in the State so that the filling stations for the vehicles may be opened with CNG outlets. It is submitted that it relates to the policy of the Ministry of Petroleum and, therefore, Union of India can disclose whether the CNG operated vehicles can be started in the capital city of Jharkhand, i.e., Ranchi.
Learned Counsel for the Union of India is directed to seek instruction from the Ministry concerned and to find out the possibility of opening of CNG outlets in the city of Ranchi as this type of opening in Delhi has a great success and, therefore, it is right time to have the CNG vehicles in the capital city of Jharkhand and thereafter in big cities to reduce pollution. Since it is a policy decision, specific instructions may be obtained by the Learned Counsel and may be submitted before this Court by way of affidavit by 28.11.2011.
Copy of this counter affidavit filed on behalf of District Transport Officer, Ranchi, may be provided to the counsel for the Pollution Board, who may in turn submit a report about the level of pollution in various places of Ranchi so that it may be estimated whether there is any control of sound and other pollution by implementing the provisions of Motor Vehicles Rules of 1989 in relation to the noise pollution and emission by the vehicles. The same may be filed on or before 28.11.2011.
Put up this case on 28.11.2011.
I.A. No. 994 of 2011
The applicant wants to file appropriate writ petition for a relief as claimed in I.A No. 994 of 2011.
In view of the above, I.A. No. 994 of 2011 is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to the applicant to avail the remedy available in accordance with law.
I.A. No. 1120 of 2011
The applicant has submitted this application alleging that a portion of the building on plot No. 1223, village Seram Holding No. 736/B New Ward No. 14 (old word No. 5), P.S. No. 210, Chutia, District Ranchi measuring area 226.2 Sq. m. i.e. 2866.5 Sq. ft for which plan was sanctioned by RRDA vide D.C. No. 112/06 and has been gifted by Gift deed dated 18.5.2011 consisting of an area of 63.29 Sq. m i.e., 681 sq. ft., is in illegal possession of Dinesh Kaura, who is running Krisha Bhojnalaya thereon, which is required to be evicted and demolished. Learned Counsel for the Dinesh Kaura submits that the applicant of I.A No. 1120/2011 is none-else than the landlord of Dinesh Kaura and the applicant wants to take revenge even when Dinesh Kaura is a lawful tenant and is legally in occupation. In view of the above, according to the Learned Counsel of Dinesh Kaura, this I.A is not maintainable.
Prima facie, it is a private dispute and, therefore, no order can be passed by this Court. However, if it is falling in the category of encroachment over any public property by Dinesh Kaura, then the matter may be considered by RRDA and RRDA may pass appropriate order after hearing the said Dinesh Kaura. The applicant may submit his representation to the RRDA after giving advance copy to the said Dinesh Kaura and the RRDA may pass appropriate order after herring the said Dinesh Kaura and after recording the finding as to whether it is encroachment or not and may proceed in accordance with law.
I.A. No. 1120 of 2011 is disposed of accordingly.