ATUL KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned AC to SC 9 for the State; Mr. Prasoon Sinha, learned counsel for the Patna Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation') and Mr. Ashok Kumar Choudhary, leaned counsel for the respondent no. 7.

(2.) The petitioner has moved the Court for the following reliefs:

(3.) The issue relates to demolition of Kiosk No. 8 located on the premises of Maurya Lok Complex in the city of Patna by the Corporation, which was originally allotted to one Onkar Nath Singh. The petitioner in the writ petition has claimed to be the allottee and at various paragraphs he has stated with regard to the steps he took at the time of allotment of the Kiosk on lease basis in the year 1995. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Corporation on 20.09.2019, after service of copy on learned counsel for the petitioner on 19.09.2019. In the said counter affidavit, a categorical stand has been taken that the petitioner was a non-entity and had no locus to maintain the present writ application as he was never an applicant, muchless, allottee of the aforesaid Kiosk No. 8. It was stated that the original allottee was Onkar Nath Singh and after that the Kiosk has not been allotted to any other person. It appears that the petitioner thereafter filed a rejoinder which has been affirmed on 09.12.2019 in which he has admitted that he is not the original allottee and also the fact that Onkar Nath Singh was the original allottee. However, his stand is that he has been given Power of Attorney by Onkar Nath Singh to deal with the Kiosk in question. Copy of the said General Power of Attorney has been registered on 29.04.2013 before the Deputy Registrar, Ranchi City Area-2. Copy of another document has also been brought on record which is revocation of General Power of Attorney executed in favour of the intervenor (respondent no. 7). The said revocation has been made on 08.06.2005 with regard to the General Power of Attorney executed in favour of the respondent no. 7 on 25.12.2004. However, such revocation document is only on Rupees 100 Non Judical stamp paper and neither notorised nor registered.