Kavita Kumari vs The State of Jharkhand and Others

D.N. Patel

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that suffice it will be for disposal of this writ petition, if a direction is given to respondent no. 2 to treat this writ petition as a representation and decide the claim of the petitioner, by passing a detailed speaking order, in accordance with law and within stipulated time, as given by this Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the respondents, who have submitted that they have no much objection, if such a direction is given to respondent no. 2 to treat this writ petition as a representation and decide the claim of the petitioner, by passing a detailed speaking order, in accordance with law and within stipulated time, as given by this Court.

In view of these submissions, I hereby direct respondent no. 2 (Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga) to treat this writ petition as a representation and decide the claim of the petitioner, by passing a detailed speaking order, in accordance with law, rules, regulations, polices and Government enforceable orders, applicable to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and practicable, preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order of this Court, after giving an adequate opportunity of being heard to the petitioner or to her representative. Respondent no. 2 shall also keep in mind the fact that Annexure- A/1 annexed with the memo of the counter affidavit reveals that the petitioner was not residing in a particular village. This endorsement is the basis of the whole dispute. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the endorsement is factually incorrect and there is no basis of this endorsement. Learned counsel for the respondent-State is unable to point out any basis, worth the name, that in what circumstances this endorsement is made in last column against the name of the petitioner at Annexure- A/1 annexed with the counter affidavit filed by the State, therefore, respondent no. 2 shall ask for the basis of the endorsement made against the name of the petitioner at Annexure- A/1 of the counter affidavit and if there is no basis then the claim of the petitioner will be considered, in accordance with law. The petitioner is also claiming herself to be a Post Graduate and resident of the very same village. The petitioner will be given adequate opportunity of being heard and to give evidences in support of her contention and after hearing the necessary party i.e. respondent no. 6. the decision will be taken by respondent no. 2.

If the decision is taken in favour of the present petitioner, necessary actual benefits of the said decision will be extended to her within further period of four weeks, thereafter.

In view of the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of.