ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY,J. - (1.) Heard Mr. Rohit Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the following orders:- a. Order dated 31.7.2007, as contained in Annexure-6, to the writ petition passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Ranchi Regional Development Authority, Ranchi, dismissing Misc. Appeal No. 1 of 2006 filed by the petitioner. b. order dated 30.12.2005 passed in Unauthorized Construction Case No. L.S/1/2005 by the Vice Chairman Ranchi Regional Development Authority, Ranchi, as contained in Annexure-4, whereby the petitioner has been directed to remove the illegal construction or else to suffer demolition at the hands of the Ranchi Regional Development Authority.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits As follows:- (a) Inspection was conducted in the presence of the petitioner on 21.4.2005 by three Junior Engineers wherein it was reported that the petitioner was getting construction done on G+2 floors and when the petitioner was asked to produce sanctioned map he could produce the same. In view of the report, rough sketch was also prepared which is at page 24 of the writ petition. (b) By annexure-2 dated 26.4.2005 another report was prepared on the basis of the inspection report dated 21.4.2005 by only one of the Junior Engineers inspecting the site mentioning that shuttering work was going on and the petitioner was directed to stop the work of illegal construction. (c) Thereafter notice was issued to the petitioner vide letter no. LS/01/05-112 dated 26.4.2005 alleging violation of Sections 35 and 36 of the Jharkhand Regional Development Authority Act, 2001 mentioning therein that the petitioner may produce the copy of the sanctioned map or may apply for further sanction and appear on 4.5.2005 before the said authority, failing which appropriate action for demolition under section 54 of the said Act will be taken and penalty under section 52 will be imposed. (d) Thereafter U.C. Case No. LS/1/2005 was proceeded against the petitioner and ultimately the impugned order dated 30.12.2005 was passed by the Respondent no.1 authority asking the petitioner to remove illegal construction work within fifteen days, failing which the same will be demolished and the expenses incurred for demolition will be realized from the petitioner. (e) Against this order, the petitioner filed Misc. Appeal No. 1 of 2006, copy of which is annexed as annexure-5 to the writ petition. (f) This appeal was dismissed by the appellate authority vide impugned order dated 31.7.2007.;