Disposed

Munna and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2021WRIC/7604/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the rejection of residential house allotment under the Pradhanmantri Awas Yojana. Since the authorities rectified the eligibility of the second petitioner by adding her to the list, the court held the petition infructuous.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed off as the second petitioner was reinstated in the list of eligible candidates.

Munna and Another Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 40

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7604 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Munna And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nand Kishor Mishra,Shilpa Ahuja Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Abhinav Ojha,Sant Ram Sharma

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.

¶5

On 17.6.2021 following order was passed:

¶6

"By the impugned order dated 15.01.2021, the application of the petitioner no.1 for allotment of residential house under Pradhanmantri Awas Yojana, has been rejected on the ground that an accommodation has been allotted to him and thus he is not eligible under the scheme.

¶7

The application of the petitioner no.2 has been rejected on the ground that although the petitioner no.2 is a divorced lady but her mother owns the house and, therefore, the petitioner no.2 is not entitled.

¶8

We find that the reasons recorded in the impugned order for non suiting the petitioner no.2 for allotment of a residential accommodation under the Pradhanmantri Awas Yojana, prima facie appear to be not justifiable.

¶9

Learned standing counsel prays for and is granted a week's time to obtain instructions.

¶10

Put up as a fresh case before the appropriate Bench on 24.06.2021."

¶11

Pursuant to the above order, the learned Standing Counsel has obtained written instructions from the District Magistrate/Chairman, District Urban Development Authority, Mahoba. A copy of the written instructions have been passed on to the Court.

¶12

A perusal of the written instructions reveal that the claim of the second petitioner was found valid and she has been reintroduced in the list of eligible candidates.

¶13

As by last order dated 17.6.2021 the petition was entertained only to examine the claim of the petitioner no. 2 and now the name of the petitioner no. 2 has been added in the list of eligible candidates, the petition is rendered infructuous and is disposed off , accordingly.

¶14

Order Date :- 2.8.2021 A. V. Singh

Munna and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munna and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 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

Ramnath Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Jairam Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Niyajuddin Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

M/S Raj Corporation Limited Vs Ministry of Road Transport and Highways Government of India and 5 Others

Zaman Belal Vs U.P. Sunni Waqf Board and 3 Others

Sudhanshu Kumar Chouhan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others