Disposed

Shyam Babu Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2021WRIC/869/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that since an order imposing a fine under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 was stayed in an appeal, the Tehsildar had no authority to issue a recovery citation. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to file an application to recall the citation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file application to recall the recovery citation; Tehsildar to pass appropriate order.

Shyam Babu Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 37 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 869 of 2021 Petitioner :- Shyam Babu Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sharangpani Vikramdhar Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Sharangpani Vikramdhar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the State.

¶4

Petitioner was imposed fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- (one lac) in terms of orders dated 11.1.2019 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (City), Allahabad as per the provisions of Section 26 (2) (ii) of Food and Safety Standard Act, 2006. The said order was challenged in appeal being Food Safety Appeal No. 28 of 2019 which was admitted vide order dated 14.3.2019 and effect and operation of the order dated 11.1.2019 has been stayed.

¶5

It is contended that in spite of the order dated 14.3.2019 passed by the Appellate Authority staying the effect and operation of the order imposing fine passed by Additional District Magistrate (City), a recovery citation has been issued by the Tehsildar for recovery of Rs. 1,00,000/- (one lac) as arrears of land revenue from the petitioner. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that since the appeal is pending and interim order is operating, the Tehsildar has no authority to issue the recovery citation against the petitioner, which is impugned in the writ petition.

¶6

Since the principal order dated 11.1.2019 passed by the ADM City had already been stayed, there is no question of recovery of any amount as arrears of land revenue against the petitioner.

¶7

In these circumstances, petitioner is directed to file an application before the Tehsildar itself for recalling the recovery citation within a week from today. In case such an application is made, the respondent no.3 Tehsildar,Sadar, Prayagraj shall pass an appropriate order within a period of three weeks from the date of the application is made, keeping in mind that against the order dated 11.1.2019, appeal is pending, in which interim order is also operating and no final order has been passed till date.

¶8

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶9

Order Date :- 19.1.2021/Akbar

Shyam Babu Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Babu Yadav 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yadvendra Mani Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Kamar Talak and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raghavendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhart and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ganga Ram Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Manish Jain and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others