Allowed

Rakesh Kumar Agrawal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2019WRIC/29868/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged an order for non-disposal of a stay application in a statutory appeal regarding a demolition order. The High Court allowed the writ petition, staying the demolition order until the appeal concludes and directed expedited disposal within six months, citing the Supreme Court decision in Mool Chand Yadav.

What did the court decide?

Stayed the order of demolition dated 26 December 2018 till the final disposal of the appeal and directed the Commissioner to dispose of the appeal within six months.

Rakesh Kumar Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 29868 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Agrawal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Rai,Ankit Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dharmendra Singh Chauhan

¶4

Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is granted liberty to correct the description of the second respondent. Let appropriate amendments be carried out forthwith.

¶6

This petition seeks quashing of the order dated 7 February 2019. However, learned counsel for the petitioner clarifies that the relief is claimed to the extent that the Commissioner acting as the Appellate Authority has failed to pass any order on the Stay Application which was moved.

¶7

The statutory appeal has been preferred under Section 27(2) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act 1973. The Court notes that although the Commissioner has admitted the appeal and placed it for final disposal on merits, he has failed to pass any order on the Stay Application which was moved. That part of the order is clearly rendered unsustainable in light of the decision of the Supreme Court of Mool Chand Yadav and another v. Raza Buland Sugar Company Limited, Rampur and others, (1982) 3 SCC 484. Since the order of demolition clearly has an impact on the valuable rights of the petitioner, it was incumbent upon the Commissioner to pass appropriate orders of protection during the pendency of the appeal. The position in law, as noticed above, is

¶8

fairly conceded by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶9

Accordingly and for the reasons aforenoted, the instant writ petition is allowed. The order of demolition dated 26 December 2018 impugned in the appeal shall remain stayed till the final disposal of the appeal which has been preferred. The Commissioner shall endeavour to dispose of the appeal with expedition and preferably within a period of six months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits on instructions that the petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of the appeal and no unnecessary adjournments shall be taken.

¶11

Order Date :- 19.9.2019 LA/-

Rakesh Kumar Agrawal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar Agrawal 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brij Kishore Vs the Collector and Others

Smt. Long Shree Vs State of U.P. and Others

Virendra Vs State of U.P. Thru Principal Secy. and Ors.

Ramraj Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sr. Divisional Manager L.I.C. of India and Another Vs Employees Provident Fund Organisation and Others

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others