RADHA RAMAN PRASAD v. G.M., PATRATU THARMAL POWER
Court: High Court of Jharkhand
Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Jharkhand judgment dated 2024-12-20. RADHA RAMAN PRASAD v. G.M., PATRATU THARMAL POWER. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (C) No. 4502 of 2006 Radha Raman Prasad son of Late Sheodhari Mahto, resident of Qr. No. 256, Road No. 11, P. O. +P. S. -Patratu, P. T. P. S. , Distt- Hazaribagh (Jharkhand). … … Petitioner Versus 1. General Manager, Patraru Thermal Power Station, Patraru, Distt- Hazaribagh. 2. Accounts Officer, Patratu Thermal Power Station, Patratu, Hazaribagh. 3. The Chairman, Jharkhand State Electricity Board Engineering Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 4. The Secretary, Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Engineering Bhawan, Ranchi. 5. The Director of Accounts, Jharkhand State Electricity Board Engineering Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 6. The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Belly Road, Patna. 7. The Director of Accounts, Bihar State Electricity Board Vidyut Bhawan, Belly Road, Patna. … … Respondents --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- 14/20. 12. 2024 1. Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Mr.
Mrinal Kanti Roy, Senior Standing Counsel on behalf of JUVNL is present. 3. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- “for issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/direction(s)/order(s) commanding upon the respondents to return the Sale Deed of the petitioner pertaining to Plot No. 2183, Khata No. 349, Mouza No. 5257, Thana-Gardanibagh, Patna which had been mortgaged to the respondents vide Office Order No. 151 HB- 10204188-330 dated 18. 01. 89 (Annexure-1) while taking a loan of Rs. 80,000=00 for constructing house over it, but inspite of payment of the full amount of the loan alongwith interest in the Month of April 2002 itself, the Sale-Deed of the petitioner has not been returned to him till date. AND/OR For issuance of any other appropriate writ(s)/direction(s)/order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper for doing conscionable and equitable justice to the petitioner. ” 4. The learned counsel for the respondent Mr.
Mrinal Kanti Roy, Senior Standing Counsel JUVNL has referred the orders dated 30. 06. 2022 and 28. 11. 2024. He has submitted that a supplementary counter affidavit dated 09. 12. 2024 has been filed before this Court wherein it is submitted the original documents have been handed over to the wife of the petitioner Mrs. Raj Kumari Prabha. She has acknowledged the fact that the original sale deed No. 7632 has been handed over to her by the Officers of answering respondents. 5. However, it is not in dispute that the original writ petitioner has expired. 6. Considering the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1 to 7 dated 09. 12. 2024 and also the fact that the sole petitioner has expired, no further order need be passed in this case. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J. ) Rakesh/-
Source: High Court of Jharkhand. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.