Disposed

Kishori Lal Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2018WRIC/39690/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika, Mirzapur to decide the petitioner's pending representation dated 24.7.2018 within three months after affording him an opportunity of hearing, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the grievances.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No. 3 to decide the representation dated 24.7.2018 within three months after affording opportunity of hearing.

Kishori Lal Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39690 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Kishori Lal Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prem Prakash Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shyam Mani Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

This writ petition, inter alia, has been filed for the following reliefs;

¶6

"i. Issue a writ order or direction, in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to decide the representation of petitioner dated 24.07.2018 pending before him within stipulated period."

¶7

ii. Issue a writ order or direction, in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to provide for suitable compensation to petitioner in respect of demolishing his house and shop within stipulated period."

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Kesav Shukla, learned counsel for the Nagar Nigam, learned Standing Counsel and perused the record.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer to the extent that the petitioner may be permitted to make a fresh representation before the concerned authority in respect of his grievances with a direction to the concerned authority to decide the same within a stipulated period.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that a representation dated 24.7.2018 in respect of his grievances is pending before the concerned authority and the same has not yet been decided and prayed that a direction may be issued to the concerned authority to decide the same within a stipulated period.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Respondent No. 3, Executive Officer, Nagar Palika, Mirzapur to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 24.7.2018 pending before it after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner

¶12

preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, copy of the writ petition and its annexures.

¶13

Order Date :- 4.12.2018

¶14

vinay

Kishori Lal Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishori Lal Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Gyan Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

M/S Chauhan Rice Mills Vs the Commissioner Meerut Region and 4 Others

Pawan Kumar Mishra Vs U.P. Technical University and 3 Others

Suneeta Devi Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Akash Joshi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Mahjabi Vs Union of India and 2 Others