Disposed

Sri Rama Shankar Gaur and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC16 Apr 2018WRIC/13564/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of a notice to remove kiosks due to alleged over-occupation of licensed land and lack of hearing before cancellation. The court directed the Nagar Nigam to give an opportunity of hearing and pending that, prohibited removal of kiosks for two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Natural justice principle invoked; Nagar Nigam directed to give opportunity by inviting reply; removal of kiosks stayed for two weeks.

Sri Rama Shankar Gaur and Another Vs State of U.P… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 39

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 13564 of 2018 Petitioner :- Sri Rama Shankar Gaur And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Harsh Vardhan Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Brijesh Ojha

¶3

Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,J. Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶4

This petition seeks the quashing of the notice dated 4 April 2018 issued by the Nagar Nigam, Moradabad to the petitioners calling upon the petitioners to remove the kiosks set up on the road-patri as the licence itself had been cancelled since the petitioners had occupied 10x10 sq.ft. of land instead of 6x8 sq.ft. provided to the petitioners.

¶5

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that no opportunity whatsoever was provided to the petitioners before cancelling the licence and though the order may have been termed as notice, it in fact, requires the petitioners to remove the kiosks since the license was cancelled.

¶6

Neither the impugned order dated 4 April 2018 indicates that any notice was provided to the petitioners before cancellation of the licence nor learned counsel appearing for the Nagar Nigam, Moradabad has placed any material before the Court to substantiate that an opportunity was provided to the petitioners before cancelling the license.

¶7

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that opportunity was not provided can be taken care of by providing that the petitioners may file a reply to the order dated 4 April 2018 treating it to be as a notice within seven days from today. In case, a reply is filed by the petitioners, the Nagar Nigam, Moradabad shall examine the same and pass an appropriate order within seven days.

¶8

For a period of two weeks or till a decision is taken by the Nagar Nigam, Moradabad, the petitioners shall not be compelled to remove the kiosks. However, if the petitioners do no file any reply within seven days, it shall be open to the Nagar Nigam, Moradabad to take further action.

¶9

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶10

Date :- 16.4.2018 Akram

¶11

(Neeraj Tiwari,J.) (Dilip Gupta,J.)

Sri Rama Shankar Gaur and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Rama Shankar Gaur and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shahnawaz Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Hakim Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

State of U.P. Thru Secy. Basic Education Govt. of U.P. Vs Neeraj Kumar Pandey and 4 Others

Deepak Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Durgesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 249 others

Abid Hasan Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others