Brindaban Singh vs Managing Director, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro and Others

Aparesh Kumar Singh

I.A. No. 2541/2012

By this interlocutory application, petitioner seeks to implead Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) as party respondent in this case, though the officials representing the Bokaro Steel Plant, a Unit of the SAIL, has already been impleaded as party respondents in the main writ application. For the reasons stated in the I.A., counsel for the petitioner is allowed to implead the Steel Authority of India Limited as respondent no. 6 in this writ application.

I.A. is disposed of.

WPC No. 1380/2007

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the order dated 03.12.2005 passed by the Estate Officer, Estate Court, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro in A/E case no. 25/2005 against the respondent nos. 4 & 5 for eviction from unauthorized occupation of illegal flour mills in Sector-III Sector Market, Bokaro Steel City, respondents have not taken any steps to execute the said order. However, from the submission of the learned counsel for the parties including the official respondents, it appears that the petitioner does not have any locus standi as no order has been passed against the petitioner.

However, be that as it may, it appears from the submission of the counsel for the parties that the authorities were required to take steps after passing of the order by the Estate Officer under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized occupation) Act, 1971 to execute its order. This court however refrain from observing on the merit of the case. It is however made clear that it will be open to the respondent authorities to take steps under the aforesaid Act in accordance with law. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.