Partly allowed

Anjali Gupta v. State of U P and 2 Others

Allahabad HC25 Mar 2019WRIC/9925/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court dismissed the writ petition seeking quashing of MAP rejection order, directing petitioner to file statutory appeal. Instead, court issued direction to Allahabad Development Authority to decide on a separate land purchase proposal by the petitioner within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to respondent no.2 to decide on the land purchase proposal within three months; liberty granted to file appeal.

Anjali Gupta Vs State of U P and 2… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9925 of 2019 Petitioner :- Anjali Gupta Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Devi Prasad Mishra

¶2

Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶3

Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel files his Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondents no.2 & 3 today in the Court. The same is taken on record.

¶4

Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents no.2 & 3 and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1.

¶5

The petitioner in the writ petition is seeking quashing of the order dated 31.12.2018 whereby his application for sanction of map in respect of Araji No.284, Village Deoghat, Pargana and Tehsil-Sadar, District Prayagraj has been rejected.

¶6

Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel submits that the petitioner has a remedy by way of appeal under Section 15 subsection 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act, 1973'). The petitioner may, therefore, file his appeal against the impugned order of 31.12.2018.

¶7

We, therefore dispose of this writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 15 sub-section 5 of the Act, 1973 against the impugned order of 13.12.2018.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that the respondents no.2 & 3 have proposed purchasing of the petitioner's land. The aforesaid proposal has been filed as Annexure-3, page 19 to the writ petition and the petitioner's consent has been filed as Annexure-3, page 20 to the writ petition.

¶9

In this view of the matter, a direction is issued to the respondent no.2, Vice-Chairman, Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad to take a decision on the proposal for purchase of the petitioner's land dated 12.07.2018 and the consent of the petitioner dated 13.09.2018 in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order in his office.

¶10

Order Date :- 25.3.2019/N Tiwari

Anjali Gupta v. State of U P and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anjali Gupta 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhagwan Aasre Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Shyam Bihari Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Kailash Chandra Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Sameer Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others