Dismissed

Rakesh Prakash Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad HC1 Nov 2019WRIC/49637/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge court dismissed a writ petition challenging demolition orders issued by the Allahabad Development Authority. The court held that disputed facts regarding unauthorized construction were involved and the petitioner possessed a statutory remedy by filing an appeal before the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, thus relegating them to the alternative forum was appropriate.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner has a statutory alternative remedy available.

Rakesh Prakash Singh and Others Vs State of U.P… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 49637 of 2007

¶3

Petitioner :- Rakesh Prakash Singh And Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Udayan Nandan,Shashi Nandan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.K. Misra

¶4

Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Udayan Nandan, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel representing respondent nos. 1 and 2. No one appears on behalf of respondents 3, 4, 5 and 6, even though, cause list has been revised.

¶6

Present writ petition has been filed challenging order dated 21.09.2007 (Annexure-9 to writ petition) passed by respondent no.3, Vice Chairman, Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad whereby Tehsildar/ Zonal Officer has been directed to remove encroachments made in Saket Nagar Colony Park as demolition orders have already been passed. Furthermore, Tehsildar/ Zonal Officer has been directed to examine the matter and take appropriate action. Further details of unauthorised colonies, which have developed in area of Zonal Officer concerned were also required to be supplied. Petitioners have further prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents not to demolish any construction situate in Saket Nagar Colony during pendency of present writ petition.

¶7

Counsel for petitioners could not dispute that disputed facts are involved in present case. For example whether any unauthorised construction has been made by petitioners on the land which formed part of petitioners' land or not; whether constructions made by petitioners are valid or not etc. Since factual dispute is involved and it is also not disputed by parties that against order impugned in this writ petition, which has been passed by respondent no.3, Vice Chairman, Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad, petitioners have statutory remedy by filing an appeal before Commissioner, Allahabad Division, Allahabad, who having co-ordinate jurisdiction, can look into the factual aspect of the matter also. In our view, it is a fit case where petitioner must be relegated to avail

¶8

statutory alternative remedy. Counsel for petitioner could not substantiate any such argument so as to dissuade this Court from not relegating petitioners to alternate forum.

¶9

Writ petition is accordingly dismissed on the ground of aforesaid remedy.

¶10

Order Date :- 1.11.2019 YK

Rakesh Prakash Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Prakash Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and 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

Saleha Zaini Vs Omar Saleem Peerzada

Executive Engineer E.D.D III Vs M/S Gogi Ice and Cold Storage and Another

Sanjeet Singh Vs Union of India and 2 Others

Smt. Neetu Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others

Suri Brother Extension and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru Principal Secry. Avas and Others

Pheru Ram and Another Vs Chairman Bank of Baroda and Another