Petitioner complained of road construction on his land without compensation. Court held consent dispute is factual, not examinable via writ. Petition dismissed for failure to approach common law remedy first.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36383 of 2019
Petitioner :- Udairaj Maurya Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Order Date :- 11.11.2019 Arshad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether petitioner could approach High Court under Article 226 dispute over road construction without consent.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Udairaj Maurya
State Of U.P.
2 Others
Sudhir Agarwal
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
