Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cadre Controlling Authority) Patna v. The Chief Secretary, State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNAMiscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 1656 of 2013 In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1083 of 2012 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13060 of 2011 ====================================================== Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (Cadre Controlling Authority) Patna, R/O 6, Bailey Road, Patna .... .... Petitioner Versus 1.The Chief Secretary, State of Bihar. 2.The Secretary, Building Construction Department, Government of Bihar. 3.The Estate Officer, Building Construction Department, Government of Bihar. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Harshwardhan Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Lalit Kishore, AAG 1 and Mr. J. S. Arora, SC-6 with Mr. Manoj Kumar, AC to SC 6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICEand HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 3 21-03-2013 This application for extension of time has been made by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Patna. The residential bungalow at 6, Bailey Road occupied by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Patna is required by the State Government for construction of a world class Museum. After several rounds of negotiations the applicant agreed to hand over vacant possession of the bungalow in his occupation and to shift to a new residential bungalow at 5-M Strand Road, Patna, now allocated to him. As the said bungalow at 5-M Strand Road required some repairs and renovations, we had, under our order dated 4[th]December 2012, directed the State Government to hand over the vacant possession of the bungalow at 5-M Strand Road and to release the fund of Rs. 25 lakhs for repairs of the said bungalow. It is admitted that pursuant to the said direction, the sum of Rs. 25 lakhs was released on 7[th] December 2012. The vacant possession of the bungalow at 5-M Strand Road was handed over to the applicant on 12[th] December 2012. We had also directed the applicant to hand over the vacant possession of the bungalow at 6, Bailey Road, Patna to the State Government as early as possible, latest by 31[st] March 2013. It is now the case of the applicant that within the time allowed by the Court, the applicant has not been able to complete the required repairs and renovations and that he be allowed to occupy the bungalow at 6, Bailey Road for a further period till 15[th]May 2013. In support of this application, a supplementary affidavit has been filed today to satisfy the Court that the time allowed to the applicant was effectively utilized. On perusal of the supplementary affidavit, it is apparent that the State Government did comply with the directions with promptitude, i.e. the State Government released the required fund immediately and handed over the vacant possession of the bungalow at 5-M Strand Road. At the end of the applicant, it appears that quite a few weeks were whiled away in correspondence and formality. The actual work of repairs and renovations was not commenced until after the mid of February, 2013. Thus, valuable time has been wasted by the applicant. Learned Additional Advocate General Mr. Lalit Kishore has appeared for the State Government. He has submitted that the State Government has no intention to chase the applicant or to put him to inconvenience. He has further submitted that the project envisaged by the State Government is worth Five Hundred crores. Having regard to the escalation of construction cost, every month of delay would cause a further loss of Five crores to the State exchequer. Learned Additional Advocate General Mr. Lalit Kishore has appeared for the State Government. He has submitted that the State Government has no intention to chase the applicant or to put him to inconvenience. He has further submitted that the project envisaged by the State Government is worth Five Hundred crores. Having regard to the escalation of construction cost, every month of delay would cause a further loss of Five crores to the State exchequer. We are sure that the State Government would not chase the applicant; nor would forcibly evict him from his present residence at 6, Bailey Road, Patna. However, keeping in view the fund available to the applicant and the machinery available to him, the applicant ought to have adhered to the time-frame decided by the Court with consensus. In above view of the matter, we earnestly believe that the applicant will make sincere efforts to complete the necessary repairs and renovations and will hand over the vacant possession of the residential bungalow at 6, Bailey Road in his occupation latest by 30[th] April 2013. Order accordingly. MJC stands disposed of. (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Dilip/Anjani.