- (1.) I.A. No. 5945 of 2014 This interlocutory application bearing I.A. No. 5945 of 2014 has been filed by the applicant for vacating the interim order passed on 2.2.2010 whereby and whereunder, this Court passed an order that no further execution and registration of the deed shall be done and any transfer which has been made, registration shall not be completed. Mr. Vimal Kirti Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that after the Civil Services Officers Co-operative Society was formed, it got registered under the Jharkhand Self-Supporting Co-operative Society Act, 1996. The said Cooperative Society has been formed to address the housing need for the officers having allocated Jharkhand Cadre belonging to All India Services or Central Service Group-A numbering 240. After its formation, the Co-operative Society sent a requisition on 15.1.2003 to the Government requesting therein to allot around hundred acres of land so that one plot of land can be allotted to each of its members. On the request made by the Society, a piece of vacant land measuring about 78.23 acres, 27 kms. away from the main town, was identified at Village-Sanga of Kanke Circle in the district of Ranchi appertaining to Khata No. 267, Plot Nos. 34, 35 and 724, which is in the nature of Gair Mazurwa Malik land. The government determined the value of the land at Rs. 1,46,85,000/- taking into account the prevailing rate for housing purpose at the rate of Rs. 1,250/- per decimal as well as Salami as Rs. 97,90,000/- and also tax over it. On deposit of the said amount, the government, by relaxing its earlier decision taken on 21.4.1987 relating to settlement of land to the Cooperative Society, settled it with the Cooperative Society and, accordingly, it was transferred in the name of the Co-operative Society on 22.11.2004. It was also pointed out that the land settled to the Co-operative Society is a barren land and has no vegetation and in its near vicinity there was no habitation. The land on being transferred to the Co-operative Society, the Co-operative Society allocated/transferred 18 decimals of land to each of its members who when took steps for getting the sale deed registered, the petitioner did file this writ petition (public interest litigation) raising grievance that on one hand such a big chunk of land is being transferred to the Co-operative Society whereas hundreds and hundreds of homeless persons are there who do not have even shelter and that too, in a throwaway price. This Court having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and without issuing notice to the respondents passed an order on 2.2.2010 to the effect as stated above. Since then the matter is pending and number of persons who were the members of the Co-operative Society got retired who do not have any land or house and some of the members have even died. Meanwhile, the construction cost got escalated and has been increasing day by day and under the situation, this interlocutory application has been filed for vacating the interim order.
(2.) Mr. Singh further submits that though the applicant has come with the case that such a big chunk of lane has been settled with the Co-operative Society on throwaway price but it has failed to establish its case rather from the facts placed before this Court by way of counter affidavit, it would appear that the price of the land at the relevant time was at Rs. 1,250/- per decimal whereas the price of per decimal of the land settled to the Cooperative Society would be coming to Rs. 1,875/- per decimal if the total amount for which the land has been settled is taken into account and thereby it is absolutely wrong on the part of the petitioner to say that the land has been settled with a throwaway price.
(3.) Further, it was submitted that one member will be having in its share only 18 decimals of land after making provision for the development of the land such as internal road, open space etc. and thereby one can never say that the excessive land has been settled with the Co-operative Society. In such situation, the Court should not have granted interim stay, as prima facie case in the facts and circumstances as stated above was never there in favour of the petitioner nor the balance of convenience was there in favour of the petitioner nor the petitioner had suffered irreparable injury and in that event, the Court in view of the decision rendered in a case of Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Bombay Environmental Action Group and Others, 2005 5 SCC 61 should not have granted interim order to the petitioner.;