- (1.) PERUSED the affidavit filed by the Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur and also the various decisions taken by the Deputy Commissioner dated 14th March, 2007, which is submitted by contempt petitioner as Annexure-6. It appears that following order was passed by this Court on 7th September, 2007 in W.P. (PIL) No. 3449 of 2007: "It is stated by counsel for the petitioner that already written representation has been made by the petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, against the installation of the industries but despite the receipt of the same, no action has been taken. It is also stated that notices were also sent to respondent no. 3 and the same has been replied. Under those circumstances, when the Deputy Commissioner has received such a representation dated 19.03.2007, he is directed to look into the matter, conduct enquiry and decide the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. With this direction, this PIL is disposed of. Let copies of this order be given to the counsel for the parties."
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that substantially decision of the Deputy Commissioner has been implemented but few issues are left out, which can also be sorted out by amicable consultations and discussions with the private companies by the Deputy Commissioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that presently Colony is facing problem of potable water, non-availability of common toilet in the colony and one more difficultly is that high tension wire is running over the residents of the colony. Learned counsel for the companies submitted that they are helping public without entering into any controversy and they will do their best in helping the residents of the colony. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the companies that so far some of the persons, who have encroached upon the land of the companies, they are not entitled to any benefit neither these facilities can be treated to be recognition of any right of any person. The contention of the respondent is not relevant in this contempt petition because of the plain and simple reason that the order dated 17.09.2007 is only brief order wherein this was not the issue that petitioners were encroachers or not and only direction was given to the Deputy Commissioner to consider the representation dated 19.03.2007 and thereafter decide the same in accordance with law. So far as question of encroachment by anybody in the premises of any of the respondents, which may be companies or may be local bodies is concerned, that issue is required to be handled by these respondents in accordance with law and there is no impediment because of the pendency of this contempt petition. However, we are of the view that when this Court has only entertained the PIL and directed the Deputy Commissioner to look into the representation of the writ petitioner then if they are entitled to certain benefits, in view of the decisions taken by the Deputy Commissioner they should be given amenities in respectable manner. Therefore, the Deputy Commissioner and the companies may look into the grievance of the writ petitioner. So far as providing for potable water and the common toilets are concerned it is the responsibility of the State and the Corporate Houses must help in giving this amenities to the residents of that colony but we make it clear that providing of such facilities shall not be treated as admission of right of any of the person who in fact has not right title over the property and authorities/companies will be free to proceed in accordance with law to protect their property by evicting the encroachers.
(3.) THE steps which has been taken by Deputy Commissioner concerned and the companies may be submitted to this Court in the month of August, 2012.;