AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
22 paragraphs · 454 wordsHeard Mr. B. Kaushik, learned counsel for the petitioner Also heard Mr. R. Borpuari, learned Standing counsel for the respondent no.1 and Mr. K.
Goswami, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondent nos.2, 3, 4 and 6 and Mr. P. Nayak, learned Standing counsel for the
GMDA.
Referring to the order dated 02.05.2018, 28.05.2018 and 23.07.2018 in WP(C) 7701/2017, it is projected by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that despite the order of status-quo passed by this Court, the officials, staff and contractors of the respondent authorities are contemplating to demolish
the house of the petitioner and accordingly, the present writ petition has been filed. It is submitted that the said previous orders passed by this Court
were produced before the authorities but they did not take cognizance of the same and are contemplating to evict the petitioner.
The learned Additional Senior Government Advocate submits that the stand of the State in the said WP(C) 7701/2017 is that the land covered by
Dag No.152(old) corresponding to 97 (new) is a Government land as per the records and in view of the encroachment by the petitioner, the State has
a right to evict the petitioner. The learned Standing counsel for the Revenue department submits that in some cases, the petitioner is referring to patta
no.1 and also claims that the land is a government land and therefore he disputes the projection made by the petitioner in this writ petition.
The learned Standing counsel for the GMDA submits that the disputed land is in the neighborhood of the children’s park which the GMDA is
constructing and therefore he expresses for urgency in the matter as it may impede the development in the park in the area.
Issue notice returnable on 15.07.2021.
As all the respondents are represented, the learned counsel for the petitioner shall serve additional copies of the writ petition within 2(two) days.
Having regard to the aforesaid orders dated 02.05.2018, 28.05.2018 and 23.07.2018 in WP(C) 7701/2017, which the learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that those are in force, the respondents are directed to abide by the said order of status-quo till the next date of listing.
Let the matter be listed on 15.07.2021 alongwith WP(C) 7701/2017 and WP(C) 7648/2017 and WP(C) 7702/2017.
The learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, the learned Standing counsel for the Revenue Department and the learned Standing counsel
for the GMDA are directed to telephonically apprise the authorities of this order as it would take sometime in transcribing the order and to upload it
online and if the eviction is not carried out till 5 p.m. today, the status-quo would be maintained as ordered earlier.
List on 15.07.2021.
