CHARANJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

LAWS(JHAR)-2008-11-79

HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND

Decided on November 21,2008

CHARANJIT SINGH Appellant

VERSUS

STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THE present writ petition has been preferred for the following reliefs: (a) to quash letter no. U -130 18/142/2006 Delhi -1(NC) dated 3rd July, 2007, issued from the Home Ministry, Government of India, informing the Home Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, that the amount of rehabilitation package is only to be paid to the victim of 1984 Sikh riot, who have earlier been paid and rehabilitation package will not be given to the persons, who did not receive earlier, (b) to quash the letter no. U -13018/46/2005 Delhi -1 (NC) dated 16.1.06 issued by the Government of India giving guideline that ex -gratia for damage uninsured commercial/industrial property would be paid at the rate of 10 times the amount minus the amount already paid if the meaning of the guideline will be understood as the version given in letter dated 3rd July, 2007, (c) to quash the Memo No. 3650 dated 2.11.2007 issued by the L.R.D.C., Chas -cum -Public Information Officer to the petitioner, informing that his claim has already been rejected in the meeting of 13.8.2007 only due to the reason that he has not received any amount earlier, (d) to direct the respondents to pay 10 times either of Rs.50,000/ -or 10 times of 50% of loss amount whichever is less to the petitioner, which have not been paid to the petitioner till date in view of letter no.43/92 -2346 dated 14.8.1992, issued by the Government of Bihar and as per letter no. U -13018/46/2005/delhi 1(NC) dated 16.1.2006 and (e) to direct the respondents to pay 10 times of assessed loss (10 times of Rs.1,06,000/ -for commercial loss + 10 times of Rs.65000/ -for loss of house property) to the petitioner in view of letter no. U -13018/46/2005/delhi 1(NC) dated 16.1.2006 as some of similarly situated persons have been provided by the authority. The case of the petitioner is that for the riot, which took place in the year, 1984, he was entitled to rehabilitation package, which was not granted to him. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he applied in the year, 1992 pursuant to the applications being invited by the State Government, which, according to him, has not even been disposed of nor communicated. Be that as it may the admitted position remains that this writ petition has been filed in the year 2007 i.e. after a lapse of 23 years after the 1984 riot and 15 years after the application and thus it suffers from gross latches and delay. Secondly the petitioner has referred to the impugned order dated 24.11.2007 wherein the reasons have been assigned. Clause 3(ix) of the circular dated 16.1.2006 reads as under: "3. The Governments of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Chhatisgarh, Haryana, Bihar, Jharkhand, J and K, Himachal Pradesh, Orissa, Maharashtra, Uttaranchal, Punjab and NCT of Delhi are requested to take immediate necessary steps to grant ex -gratia and other assistance to the victims of 1984 riots as per the following guidelines: xx xx xx (ix) In cases where the claims are supported by proof of having received the amount of compensation paid by the State Governments earlier, that may be considered as adequate and no additional proof may be required. It would be ensured that the claims are not rejected on technical/flimsy grounds. The reasons in the impugned order dated 24.11.2007 for rejecting the application of the petitioner for rehabilitation package is the aforesaid clause. Unless there is a proof of having received an amount of compensation paid by the State Government earlier, the petitioner has no claim for the Rehabilitation Package, as granted by the Central Government. Even otherwise at this belated stage, this writ petition cannot be entertained. This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed being devoid of any merits but without any order as to costs.;

Click here to view full judgement.