Disposed

Smt. Binwant Kaur and 4 Others v. the General Officer Commading-in Chief(Appellate Authority)Central Command, Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Apr 2024A227/1780/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought expeditious decision of their appeal under Section 340 of the Cantonment Act, 2006 against rejection of a building plan for reconstruction of inherited property in Meerut Cantt. Court directed the CEO to forward the appeal within two weeks and the appellate authority to decide it within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directions: appeal to be forwarded to appellate authority in two weeks; appellate authority to decide within two months with hearing to parties.

Smt. Binwant Kaur and 4 Others vs the General… — Municipal and Town Planning | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:31169

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1780 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Binwant Kaur And 4 Others Respondent :- The General Officer Commading-In Chief(Appellate Authority)Central Command, Lko. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Prashant Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Prashant Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Sri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate/Deputy Solicitor General of India assisted by Sri Surya Prakash, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent no. 1.

¶7

In the light of proposed order notice to respondent no. 2 is dispensed with.

¶8

By means of present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India petitioners have approached this Court seeking direction to respondent no. 1 - the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief (Appellate Authority), Head Quarter Central Command to consider and decide the pending appeal under Section 340 of the Cantonment Act, 2006, expeditiously.

¶9

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have joint owners of Bungalow No. 146, B.C. Lines, Meerut Cantt which was inherited by them from their mother and their names are duly recorded in the General Land Register maintained in the Office of the Defence Estates Officer, Meerut Circle, Meerut Cantt.

¶10

It is next submitted that considering the fact that the said building was old and dilapidated and required re-constructions and accordingly they moved an application for sanction to the Cantonment Board for the aforesaid purpose and submitted a building plan. The Cantonment Board has rejected the building plan submitted by the petitioners, against which they preferred an appeal under Section 340 of Cantonment Act, 2006, which according to petitioners is pending consideration since August, 2023.

¶11

Sri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate on the basis of instructions has informed this Court that an appeal has to be filed in terms of Section 341 of the Cantonment Act, 2006 and has stated that every such appeal has to be presented before the authority which has passed the order against which appeal is preferred and in the present case, the appeal was filed before the Cantonment Board, Meerut by the petitioners on 17th August, 2023.

¶12

It seems that the Chief Executive Officer, Cantonment Board, Meerut has not forwarded the appeal to the General Officer, Commanding-inChief (Appellate Authority), Head Quarter Central Command, Lucknow, due to which the matter has not been decided.

¶13

It has also been informed on behalf of Union of India that respondent no. 1 has also written a letter to the chief Executive Officer, Cantonment Board, Meerut to forward the appeal so that same can be decided expeditiously.

¶14

Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, present writ petition is decided in following terms :-

¶15

(I) The Chief Executive Officer, Cantonment Board, Meerut shall forward the copy of appeal under Section 340 of Cantonment Act, 2006, filed by the petitioners to respondent no. 1 - the General Officer, Commanding-inChief (Appellate Authority), Head Quarter Central Command, Lucknow, within maximum period of two weeks from the date a copy of this order is communicated to him.

¶16

(II) Respondent no. 1 shall proceed to consider and decide the appeal within two months from the date of receipt of appeal in the office of respondent no. 1, in accordance with law, after giving appropriate opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned.

¶17

The petitioners undertake that they will cooperate in the proceedings before respondent no. 1 and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments.

¶18

Sri S.B. Pandey, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India undertakes to communicate this order to the Chief Executive Officer, Cantonment Board, Meerut for compliance and necessary action.

¶19

With above directions the writ petition stands disposed of .

¶20

Order Date :- 22.4.2024 A. Verma

¶21

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Binwant Kaur and 4 Others v. the General Officer Commading-in Chief(Appellate Authority)Central Command, Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Binwant Kaur and 4 Others v. the General Officer Commading-in Chief(Appellate Authority)Central Command, Lko. and Another

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 Subhag and Others. Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Faizabad and Others.

Oj Prakash Dubey Vs Smt. Prema Dubey, and 4 Others

Mohammad Hasib Warsi and Another Vs Civil Judge Junior Division Court No 13 Barabanki and 2 Others

Mahesh Verma @ Mahesh Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Dhanadee Vs Civil Judge (Senior Division) Malihabad Lucknow and Another

Smt. Saroj Singh Vs the Court of Learned Civil Judge (J.D.) Haveli, Faizabad and 2 Others