Disposed

Maharaj Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC15 Sept 2023WRIC/31589/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge disposed of a writ petition by permitting the petitioner to seek interim relief against eviction before the Appellate Authority, directing protection from eviction until that application is decided.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to seek interim relief against eviction before the Appellate Authority by 16.9.2023; protection from eviction till that application is decided.

Maharaj Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:178910

¶2

Court No. - 50

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31589 of 2023 Petitioner :- Maharaj Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vaibhav Kohli,Gautam Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suresh C. Dwivedi

¶4

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra as party respondents in array of parties, during the course of the day.

¶6

Heard Shri Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri Suresh Chandra Dwivedi, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 5.

¶7

It is the case of the petitioner that he has purchased a plot No. 15-A, Ratan Estate (Khasra No. 10A) near Gata No. 1 of John Milton Public School, Chamrouli Road, Agra on which certain constructions were existing.

¶8

It appears from the record that proceedings under Section 27 (1) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 were initiated in respect of the property in question and thereafter a sealing order has also been passed.

¶9

It is contended by Shri Gautam that notice under Section 27 (1) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 was never issued against the petitioner, rather it was issued against one Shashi Bala and Harbir Singh Prajapati and an order to seal the premises was also passed against the said persons. A second sealing order was passed in which the name of the petitioner has been mentioned. The petitioner has preferred an appeal against the said order, being Appeal No. 17 of 2023 under Section 28 A (4) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, which is stated to be pending in the court of the Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that 18.9.2023 has been fixed in the said appeal. However, the respondents issued notice to the petitioner to vacate the premises within a period of three days, failing which an FIR would be lodged against the

¶11

petitioner.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner and his family members are residing in the said premises and it is their only place of residence. He submits that since his appeal is already pending consideration before the Appellate Authority, some protection be granted by this Court against his eviction.

¶13

The Court has considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. Admittedly, the appeal of the petitioner is pending consideration and is fixed for 18.9.2023. In the opinion of the Court, the relief prayed for in the present writ petition can very well be claimed by the petitioner by moving an appropriate application before the Appellate Authority.

¶14

Shri S. C. Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents submits that in the event the petitioner prefers an appropriate application seeking interim relief, the same shall be considered by the Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra/Appellate Authority on the date fixed.

¶15

In such view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to prefer an application seeking interim relief as prayed for in the present writ petition before the Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra/ Appellate Authority seized with the appeal of the petitioner by tomorrow i.e. 16.9.2023. The said application shall be considered by the Appellate Authority before dealing with the appeal fixed for 18.9.2023 and pass appropriate orders.

¶16

The petitioner undertakes to abide by orders passed on the said application. All endeavour shall be made by the Appellate Authority to dispose of the application on 18.9.2023 itself and thereafter proceed to decide the appeal itself within one month after hearing all the parties concerned.

¶17

Till 20.9.2023 or till decision on the interim application filed by the petitioner as directed by this Court, the petitioner shall not be evicted from the premises in question.

¶18

Order Date :- 15.9.2023 Ravi Prakash

¶19

(Ashutosh Srivastava, J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Maharaj Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maharaj Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 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

Saibaba Temple Gram Katara and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Manager and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Chandra Prakash Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Raghuveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

M/S Shyam Ji Ice and Cold Storage Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt.Pushpa Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others