Ramesh Kumar Sahi @ Ramesh Kumar Rahi vs The State of Jharkhand and Another

R.K. Merathia, J.—Mr. Laik, learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that the Quarter No. G-8, was allotted to the Petitioner by the Zila Parishad on 12/08/2002; and that he has been paying the rent fixed for the same, but suddenly the impugned notice dated 21/10/2009 was issued to him directing him to vacate the quarter, without following the principle of natural justice and without following the procedures of law.

Mr. Niranjan Singh, learned Counsel for the Zila Parishad submitted that admittedly, the Petitioner is a Press Reporter of Prabhat Khabar and he is not an employee of Zila Parishad. It is not known how he was allotted the said quarter though there is no provision for allotment of the quarter to any outsider. He further submitted that pursuant to the order passed in PIL for vacating unauthorized occupants, such notice was issued to the Petitioner. He also referred to the order dated 12/01/2011, passed in WPC No. 4948 of 2010 Amrendra Narain Kumar v. State and Anr. and submitted that similar writ petition was dismissed. He further submitted that the Zila Parishad is facing a contempt proceeding before the Division Bench of this Court and the next dated is fixed on 1st April, 2011.

It appears that the Petitioner has himself stated that he is a Press Reporter of Prabhat Khabar. Admittedly, he was not an employee of Zila Parishad. There was no provision for allotting the quarter to outsiders. It is not known how it was allotted to the Petitioner. Only because the quarter was allotted and the Petitioner paid rent, his occupation will not become authorized. His occupation is unauthorized ab-initio.

In the circumstances, I find no merit in this writ petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed.

The Petitioner is directed to vacate the quarter, in question, within one week from today.