IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6737 of 2009 SARITA DEVI WIFE OF LATE SANTOSH KUMAR GOYANKA, RESIDENT OF 375, A.P. COLONY GAYA, P.S. RAMPUR, DISTRICT GAYA………………………………..PETITIONER. VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY, REVENUE AND LAND REFORMS DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY REVENUE AND LAND REFORMS DEPTT. GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE COMMISSIONER, MAGADH COMMISSIONERY, GAYA. 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE-CUM-COLLECTOR, GAYA. 6. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISIONER-CUM-CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILA PARISHAD, GAYA……………………….…..RESPONDENTS. For the petitioner : Mr. Shailesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Ravi Shankar, AC to GP-7 For the Zila Parishad :Mr. Ramashish, Advocate. ----------- 06/ 08.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents authorities to hand over vacant possession of land measuring 12 feet 09 inch situated at the last corner of newly constructed Mirza Galib Market and north to the main gate of Head Post Office near G.B. Road, Gaya. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a poor widow lady whose husband had died earlier leaving behind a son who had also died and hence she had no one to look after her nor she had any source of livelihood and as such she approached the District Magistrate, Gaya for allotment of a shop to earn her livelihood in the Government Market. The said request of the petitioner was considered by the District Magistrate, Gaya and finally vide order dated - 2 - 13.04.1996 (Annexure-1) he allotted the aforesaid space to the petitioner for opening small shops therein. 4. Thereafter the Deputy Development Commissioner, Gaya also passed order dated 23.08.1996 (Anexure-2) allotting the said space on rent fixed therein and directed the authorities concerned to hand over possession of the same to the petitioner, whereafter the petitioner was to construct her shops immediately. Learned counsel for the petitioner also states that the matter was further considered by the higher authorities, whereafter order dated 08.08.2008 (Annexure-6) was issued by the Deputy Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department directing the Collector, Gaya and other authorities to enquire into the matter so that the said space be made available to the petitioner immediately. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the aforesaid orders, the authorities concerned are not heeding either to the request of the petitioner or to the directions of the higher authorities. 5. Although learned counsel for the respondents State of Bihar and its authorities opposes the contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner, but there is no counter affidavit to support his contentions. It may be noted that writ petition was filed on 22.05.2009 after serving two copies thereof in the office of the Advocate General and thereafter on 22.06.2009 also time was granted to learned counsel for the State to seek instructions and file counter affidavit. Thereafter - 3 - again on 26.08.2010 an adjournment was granted on the request of learned counsel for the respondents who wanted to seek instructions and file counter affidavit. Again on 23.09.2010 learned counsel for the respondents took adjournment for seeking instructions and filing counter affidavit but no counter affidavit was filed. Finally on 07.10.2010 when the case was again taken up by this court, learned counsel for the respondents repeated his request for adjournment for seeking instructions and filing counter affidavit and hence as a last chance adjournment was granted with a note that if by the next date also no counter affidavit was filed the Court will have no option but to presume that the State and its authorities have nothing to say about the facts stated in the writ petition. Today learned counsel for the respondents submits that in spite of his repeated letters and requests neither any instruction has been sent nor anyone of the authorities have approached him for filing any counter affidavit in the matter. In the said circumstances, this Court has no option but to accept the statement of facts made in the writ petition as admitted by the respondents. 6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances it is quite apparent that the space has been allotted by the District Magistrate, Gaya for which he was duly authorized and the said settlement was also affirmed by the Deputy Development Commissioner but in spite of that the vacant space noted above was not handed over to the petitioner. - 4 - Considering the entire facts and procedure, even the higher authorities, namely the Department of Revenue and Land Reforms gave specific directions in that regard vide order dated 08.08.2008 (Annexure-6) but even then it has not been complied. 7. In view of the plight of an old widow whose husband and son have already died leaving her absolutely helpless without any source of income, it cannot be expected that she will attend the authorities regularly. In the said circumstances, inaction of the authorities concerned smacks of sinister design requiring stringent action against them for violating the specific directions of the authorities concerned and harassing the petitioner unnecessarily. 8. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this writ petition is allowed and the District Magistrate, Gaya as well as the Deputy Development Commissioner, Gaya is directed to see to it that the aforesaid orders of the authorities concerned dated 13.04.1996, 23.08.1996 and 08.08.2008 are given effect to for which the authorities concerned must give administrative support to the petitioner for possession and construction of petitioner’s shop positively within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. In the meantime the authorities concerned must also regularize all the procedures in that connection. 9. It may be noted that non-compliance of this order will have very serious consequences and the - 5 - person/authority who is found to have violated this order shall be hauld up in a contempt case for which the petitioner must inform this Court by way of filing a contempt petition. Harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)