Disposed

Syed Shahid Akbar v. Prescribed Authority, Regulated Area / Sub-Divisional Magistrate,Sadar, Sultanpur and 4 Others

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2024/234/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court issued a direction allowing the petitioner to move an application detailing urgency before the trial court. If genuine and without legal impediment, the trial court must decide Case No.47/2020 expeditiously under the specified Act. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed liberty to move trial court detailing urgency; trial court directed to decide case expeditiously upon genuine application and no legal impediment.

Syed Shahid Akbar Vs Prescribed Authority, Regulated… — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:3159

¶2

Court No. - 6

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 234 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Syed Shahid Akbar Respondent :- Prescribed Authority, Regulated Area / SubDivisional Magistrate,Sadar, Sultanpur And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gaurav Misra,Yashi Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1.

¶7

In view of the order proposed to be passed notice to private respondents is dispensed with.

¶8

By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the Prescribed Authority, Regulated Area/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Sultanpur to conclude the proceedings of Case No.47 /2020 (State Vs. Saleem and others) under Section 10 of U.P. Regulation of Building Operations Act, 1958 at the earliest.

¶9

It has been stated that the petitioner is the owner of Gata No.376 situated at Village Gharhakhurd, Pargana Miranpur, Tehsil Sadar, District Sultanpur by way of inheritance from his father who purchased the same by sale deed dated 15.2.1966. It is further submitted that opposite party No.2 raised some construction over the land in question without having any legal and valid document to which petitioner objected and opposite party No.1 issued show cause notice on 24.6.2020 to opposite party No.s 2 to 5 who moved application on which report was called and in the assessment order of Nagar Palika the opposite parties have been shown to be the owner in possession over the property in question. Consequently, petitioner filed application on 25.6.2022 and also filed written arguments and objections on 11.7.2022. Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that despite applications having been given to the court concerned as well as authorities concerned, no action is being taken and in the aforesaid facts it has been prayed that the Prescribed Authority may be directed to decide the application preferred by the petitioner expeditiously.

¶10

Accordingly, it is provided that in case there is any urgency in the matter, the petitioner is at liberty to move an application

¶11

within two weeks from today detailing the urgency before the trial court for expeditious disposal of the said case. In case the trial court is of the opinion that the application is genuine, he shall allow the same. Thereafter the court concerned shall proceed to decide Case No.47 /2020 (State Vs. Saleem and others) under Section 10 of U.P. Regulation of Building Operations Act, 1958 expeditiously in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations / directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶13

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 11.1.2024 RKM.

¶15

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Syed Shahid Akbar v. Prescribed Authority, Regulated Area / Sub-Divisional Magistrate,Sadar, Sultanpur and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Shahid Akbar v. Prescribed Authority, Regulated Area / Sub-Divisional Magistrate,Sadar, Sultanpur and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Swarup and Another Vs Additional District Judge Court NO.6 Lakhimpur Kheri and Ors.

Smt. Bitti Devi Vs State of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy.Deptt.of Food and Civil SUPPL.and4OR

Sudha Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Panchayat Raj and 3 Ors.

Ram Chander Verma Vs Civil Judge J.D. Sadar Faizabad and Others

Raja Ram Tewari Vs Collector Faizabad and 3 Ors.

Prabhagiya Nideshak Van Vs Van.Evam Sangik Vanki Karmachari