HC annuls govt order cancelling Khas Mahal Lease of city apartment
The high court has also quashed the state govt direction of Sept 14, 2004, which directed the Patna district magistrate to resume the entire building as govt property.
A single bench of Justice Alok Kumar Sinha, while hearing a writ petition of one Robert Lakra and 28 other residents of the apartment, delivered this judgment on July 11, a copy of which was uploaded on the HC website on Tuesday.
Senior counsel Chitranjan Sinha and advocate Jitendra Kishore Verma, while representing the petitioners, argued that the cancellation of the lease was arbitrary and whimsical as no condition stipulated in the deed was violated. The state govt gave prior permission to the leaseholder for re-allotment of the land as far back as in 1989. Later, the govt revoked the permission without giving any prior notice to the leaseholder or subsequent allottees.
Justice Sinha held that the state govt's order is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of the fundamental rights of the apartment dwellers.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
14 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Calcutta High Court dismisses teachers' petitions against new SSC recruitment rules
Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has dismissed all the petitions regarding the School Service Commission (SSC)'s new recruitment notification where 'untainted' teachers who lost their jobs after the Supreme Court ruling had petitioned against many of the subject seats being reduced, and the eligibility criteria of the 2025 exams being different from 2016 making the process harder for older candidates. The division bench of Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Smita Das De delivered the judgement on Wednesday (July 16, 2025). They said that they will not interfere in the new notification issued by the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) new recruitment notification. A week back, Justice Saugata Bhattacharya of Calcutta High Court had only said that the government must take out the 'tainted' candidates out of the new examination; this judgement was upheld at the division bench ruling on Wednesday. Mehboob Mondal, a representative of the 'Joggya Sikkhak Sikkhika Adhikar Mancha' (Deserving Teachers' Rights Forum) told The Hindu that the new rules of the 2025 recruitment is not allowing special candidates to fill up forms, even candidates with 40-45% marks are barred, but all of them had cracked the exams in 2016. This has left them in the lurch, even though they have served in schools as untainted teachers for over seven years. He also added that some subjects like Chemistry or Nepali language have no seats in 2025 exams, but the same teachers got jobs in 2016, now they have no option but to skip the exams and lose their jobs. 'We had petitioned that we should not have to compete with fresh candidates because we had already passed the exam. The 2016 panel should have been separately recruited. We are losing all faith in the judiciary because they failed us and we are being punished and losing jobs because of the government's corruption,' Habibullah, a representative of JSSAM said. He also shared doubts that the same WBSSC body, which was caught in a corrupt recruitment process by the Supreme Court, has been directed to conduct the rehiring process. 'What is the guarantee that they will not steal our jobs again? Finding the tainted candidates cannot be our responsibility. It was either the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) responsibility or the government's responsibility, why are we being criminalised for their lacking?' Mr Habibullah added. Previously, the JSSAM representatives had said that they were against filling out the new recruitment form because they are 'untainted' candidates, the last date for which is July 21. They wanted a review petition at the Supreme Court before the last date, but it has not yet been listed. According to the representatives, this has led to a section of the 'untainted' teachers filling up the new recruitment form to stay on the safe side, so they have a shot at getting back to their old jobs. After the verdict was announced, state lawyer and Trinamool Congress MP Kalyan Banerjee called it a victory for the state. 'The court has recognized the state's rights. The Supreme Court has said that the recruitment process has to be started according to the 2016 recruitment process. The court did not accept the unreasonable request. We also have to consider how many people have come in the last nine years,' Mr Banerjee added. According to the last WBSSC notification for the 2025 recruitment, the experienced teachers will get a 10 marks advantage. This is the only leeway that the 2016 panel of teachers will get in the fresh hiring process. The petitions were in response to the Supreme Court ruling, which upheld the cancellation of approximately 26,000 appointments made during the 2016 recruitment process conducted by the WBSSC, citing irregularities. On April 17, the top court allowed 'untainted' candidates to continue in service until December 31, or until a fresh selection process is completed.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
HC dismisses 4 appeals, clears decks for fresh SSC recruitment
1 2 Kolkata: Calcutta High Court on Wednesday dismissed four appeals against certain sections of the 2025 rules for the fresh selection process to be conducted by School Service Commission (SSC). Clearing the decks for recruitment, HC said the appelants, by mere participation, did not acquire any vested right. The HC observed that, with time, vacancies were bound to increase and that courts were confronted every day with a large number of cases where posts could not be filled due to pending litigations. "Although WBCSSC and WBBSE are responsible for the present impasse that has adversely impacted and affected the education system, it is high time that all the vacancies are filled up if required by clubbing the vacancies, as the separate recruitment process for vacancies declared in 2016 and beyond would cause serious inconvenience and delay in filling up existing vacancies. It would also affect the state exchequer," the court held. You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata The division bench of justices Soumen Sen and Smita Das De held that the policy decision of govt could only be under judicial scrutiny in "exceptional circumstances where it appears that the policy or some clauses in the policy are manifestly arbitrary, discriminatory, mala fide, unreasonable or unfair, or if it is found to be against any statute or Constitution." It was noted that the recruitment rules 2025 per se were not under challenge. "The appellants, by reason of mere participation, do not acquire any vested right. It is a mere exception that in the event all the posts are not filled up or any vacancy arises due to the failure of a successful candidate to join the post within a stipulated time, if they are 'waiting list' candidates, they would be considered for filling up such vacant posts in terms of the merit list," the HC said. "The enhancement of the mark or declaration of further vacancies, in our respectful view, is not arbitrary," the bench stated, while adding that the eligibility criteria in the selection process of 2016 were different from the 2025 recruitment process. "The rules are more stringent and student-centric. The revision in the eligibility criterion is in accordance and consonance with the NCTE guidelines," the HC held. "In order to select the most suitable candidates, proportionate weightage based on the length of experience to the extent of 10 marks be given to such candidates is not arbitrary. The object is to select and appoint experienced teachers," the HC added. Certain provisions of the rules of 2025, relating to the fixation of minimum marks in graduation/post-graduation level to adjudge eligible candidates to participate in the selection process and the changed pattern of allotment of marks, were challenged by the petitioners. They also submitted that SSC was not authorised or permitted to fill vacancies declared for the 1st SLST 2016 along. It was submitted that the declared vacancies of 1st SLST 2016 were required to be filled up based on the eligibility criterion mentioned in the rules of 2016.
United News of India
an hour ago
- United News of India
SC asks SIT to focus only on Mahmudabad's ‘Op Sindoor' posts; bars further summons
New Delhi, July 16 (UNI) The Supreme Court today questioned the Haryana Police Special Investigation Team (SIT) for allegedly misdirecting itself in the probe against Ashoka University Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad over his two social media posts on 'Operation Sindoor'. A bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi observed that the SIT was formed specifically to investigate the contents of the two posts and asked why it was expanding the scope of inquiry. The observation came after senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mahmudabad, submitted that the SIT had seized his devices and was asking about his foreign trips over the last ten years, despite the court's May 28 order limiting the probe to the posts. 'We just want to know from SIT for what purpose they have seized devices. We will call them (officers),' Justice Kant said, adding, 'we are asking why SIT is, on the face of it, misdirecting itself. They were supposed to examine contents of the posts.' ASG SV Raju, appearing for Haryana, submitted that the manner of investigation was the prerogative of the investigating officer and all incriminating aspects had to be examined. Sibal countered that there could not be a 'roving inquiry' and added that Mahmudabad had already been summoned four times. Taking note of the SIT's interim report acknowledging the seizure of devices and their forensic examination, the court recorded that Mahmudabad had cooperated with the investigation and surrendered his devices. Directing that he should not be summoned again, Justice Kant remarked, 'You don't require him, you require a dictionary.' The bench dictated its order stating, 'Though it may not be expedient or desirable for us to comment on the manner in which SIT has proceeded, we deem it necessary to remind it of the mandate contained in our order dated May 28 and consequently direct the SIT to conclude its investigation with reference to the contents of the two social media posts as early as possible but not later than four weeks.' The court also clarified that Mahmudabad, while restrained from commenting on sub judice issues, was free to write or express opinions on other topics. On May 21, the court had granted interim bail to Mahmudabad and directed the Haryana DGP to constitute an SIT comprising senior IPS officers not belonging to Haryana or Delhi to examine his two posts. It had clarified that the SIT probe would remain confined to these two FIRs and could not be expanded. During the hearing today, the court also asked the Haryana government about its response to the National Human Rights Commission taking cognizance of the registration of FIRs in the case. 'You tell us about that also,' Justice Kant told the Haryana AAG. Mahmudabad was arrested on May 18 over his posts on 'Operation Sindoor' and remained in custody until May 21. He faces charges under Section 196, 152, and other provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to acts prejudicial to communal harmony, making assertions likely to cause disharmony, acts endangering national sovereignty, and words or gestures intended to insult a woman's modesty. UNI SNG PRS
