Petitioner sought mandamus for recovery of land under Urban Land Repeal Act. Court directed competent authority to decide petitioner's representation within twelve weeks without expressing opinion on merits.
Directed respondent no.3 to decide petitioner's representation dated 04.02.2021 within twelve weeks.
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. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 34640 of 2021 Petitioner :- Jangi Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Nath Tripathi,Kamlesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
The petitioner claims that he is entitled to benefit of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 in respect of proceedings undertaken by respondents with regard to the property situated in urban area. In paragraph 7 of the writ petition, it is asserted that the petitioner and Ramji, co-tenure holder, are in peaceful possession of the subject land. It is also specific case of the petitioner that no legal proceedings under Section 10 (6) of the Act has been under taken till date.
The petitioner has prayed for a mandamus commanding the respondents to decide the representation made by him in this behalf and enter his name in revenue records in place of the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite repeated reminders, respondents are not deciding the claim of the petitioner.
Learned Standing Counsel very fairly states that representation of the petitioner shall be decided by Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Allahabad within such time as may be directed by this Court.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent no.3 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 04.02.2021 expeditiously, preferably, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of true attested copy of the instant order alongwith photocopy of the representation dated 04.02.2021.
(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.) Order Date :- 27.1.2022 Ajeet
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to benefit of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999.
Whether the respondents are failing to decide the petitioner's representation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jangi Lal
State Of U.P
Respondent No. 2
Respondent No. 3
Respondent No. 4
Manoj Kumar Gupta
Shekhar Kumar Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
