Disposed

Archana Banodha v. the State of Uttar Pradesh and Another

Allahabad HC23 Dec 2022WRIC/39740/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking quashing of a demand notice for subdivision charges. While noting a stay by the Apex Court, the court directed the petitioner to submit an undertaking for payment with interest if liable. Upon compliance, recovery shall be stayed and the building plan sanctioned.

What did the court decide?

Stay on recovery of subdivision charges including interest if petitioner submits an undertaking to pay the same, subject to final outcome of SLP No. 20258 of 2018.

Archana Banodha Vs the State of Uttar Pradesh and Another — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39740 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Archana Banodha Respondent :- The State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Gyanendra Singh,Mina Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pawan Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Sri Avadhesh Narayan Dubey, counsel for respondent no. 2.

¶6

Though the writ petition has been filed for quashing the demand notice dated 13.12.2022 which relates to the sub-division charge as well as other charges, but learned counsel for the petitioner has confined the prayer only to the levy of sub division charges demanded under the impugned notice dated 13.12.2022 in respect of building plan submitted by the petitioner for approval before the Development Authority.

¶7

Learned counsel for the parties do not dispute that in so far as levy of sub divisional charges is concerned, same has already been stayed by the Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 20258 of 2018 (Sri Ram Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. Vice Chairman, Muzaffarnagar Development Authority & Others) . The order of the Apex Court reads as under:-

¶8

"Issue notice.

¶9

Tag with Civil Appeal No.4489 of 2014.

¶10

There shall be stay on sub-division charges from the petitioner; however, we make it clear that in case the petitioner is ultimately found liable, he shall be liable to pay the same, with interest, as may be determined at the time of final order."

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, on instructions, that the petitioner is prepared to abide by the final outcome of above SLP, along with liability of interest, if any.

¶12

We, accordingly, dispose of this petition with a direction that the petitioner shall submit an undertaking before the second respondent for payment of sub division charges with interest, if any chargeable, subject to final outcome of the above SLP. If any such undertaking is submitted within two weeks from today and the petitioner pays the remaining amount under the impugned demand, there shall be a stay on recovery of sub division charges until the final outcome of the above SLP and the building plan shall be sanctioned and released forthwith, unless there is any other legal impediment.

¶13

However, in the event of default on the part of the petitioner, this order shall automatically cease to have any effect without fu rther reference to the Court.

¶14

(Jayant Banerji J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 23.12.2022 Jaideep/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- JAIDEEP BANERJEE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Archana Banodha v. the State of Uttar Pradesh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Archana Banodha v. the State of Uttar Pradesh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Daleep Singh Vs Union of India and 5 Others

Bilal Ahamad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

M/S Jay Prakash Thekedar Vs Commissioner, Commercial Taxes and Another

Shakeel Ahmad and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Irshad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jararuddin Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others