Sachin Kumar Sharma vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing Bandobasti Notice

No. 23/2019-2020 dated 24th February, 2020 issued by the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Simdega-respondent No.5 (Annexure-1 to the writ

petition) whereby an application was invited for Bandobasti Settlement of the weekly Bazar, Simdega for the period from 1st April, 2020 to 31st

March, 2021, but due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the terms of Bandobasti could not be met out. Further prayer has been made for quashing letter

No. 636(ii)/2020 dated 05.03.2020, letter No. 807(ii)/2020 dated 27.03.2020 and letter No. 929(ii)/2020 dated 23.04.2020 (Annexure-3 series to the

writ petition) all issued by the respondent No.5 whereby the petitioner has been asked to execute an agreement for the said Bandobasti of the weekly

Bazar, Simdega which the petitioner obtained in the final bid in pursuance of Bandobasti Notice No. 23/2019-2020 dated 24.02.2020. It has also been

prayed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to refund/return a sum of Rs.28,80,000/- which the petitioner has deposited before the Nagar

Panchayat, Simdega on 05.03.2020 by way of an advance for Bandobasti of the weekly Bazar, Simdega.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that the petitioner has already represented the respondent No.5 informing inter alia that in the

wake of COVID-19 situation and due to continuance of lockdown in the district of Simdega, it is not possible for the petitioner to make the required

collection and thus Clause-4 of Bandobasti Notice No. 23/2019-2020 cannot be fulfilled and therefore the Bandobasti which has been made in his

favour for the weekly Bazar, Simdega, should be cancelled and the advance amount deposited in the office of the Nagar Panchayat, Simdega should

be refunded to him. It is further submitted that despite the representations preferred by the petitioner, the respondent No.5 has not responded to the

same which has caused great inconvenience and financial loss to the petitioner.

Mr. A.C to S.C-VII appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the present matter is required to be considered by a competent authority.

Hence, if the petitioner prefers a fresh representation before the respondent No.5, an appropriate decision will be taken by the said authority on the

present issue.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the prayer made in the present writ petition, without entering into the

merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to file a fresh representation before the respondent No.5 on the present issue. On receipt of such

representation, the respondent No.5, after providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, shall take an appropriate informed decision within a

period of two months from the date of filing of the said representation.

The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction.