Disposed

Alok Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Special Secy. Deptt. of Housing and Urban Planning Lko. and 7 Others

Allahabad HC20 Aug 2024WRIC/7112/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a listing order in a writ petition seeking to quash sealing orders against a petrol pump and stay execution. The court directed filing of affidavits, listed the case, and stayed the sealing proceedings until the next date.

What did the court decide?

Sealing orders issued against the petitioner's Petrol Pump stayed till the next date of listing.

Alok Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Special Secy… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 3

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7112 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Alok Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Special Secy. Deptt. Of Housing And Urban Planning Lko. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunpreet Singh,Sharad Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gauri Suwan Pandey,Manish Jauhari,Ratnesh Chandra,Vinod Kumar Yadav,Vivek Kumar Yadav,Yogendra Nath Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents, Shri Manish Jauhari, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.6, Shri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel who had initially accepted notice on behalf of L.D.A. but has informed this Court that the matter has been assigned to one Rajneesh Kumar Singh, Advocate, who is not present today to assist this Court. We, therefore direct Shri Ratnesh Chandra, learned Counsel to assist this Court.

¶6

The instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

¶7

"(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the impugned orders dated 10.05.2024, 16.01.2024 & 30.09.2022 passed by opp. party no. 1, vice-chairman and opp. party no. 5 respectively and impugned notice dated 24.07.2024 passed by officers of opp. party no. 3 (annexed as Annexure Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4) and all other further consequential actions including notice for sealing the premises of the petitioner, if any may also be quashed."

¶8

It is the case of the petitioner that the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. issued an advertisement on 25.12.2018 for retail outlet/Petrol Pump. The petitioner has applied on the basis of a lease deed signed by the respondent No.8 by offering land situated at Khursiroad, Khasra No.204, Village-Paikaramau, Bakshi Ka Talab, District-Lucknow. The letter of intent was issued subject to issuance of No Objection Certificate (N.O.C.) by various departments. Such N.O.C. was issued by various departments including the L.D.A., the Nagar Nigam, the P.W.D. etc. A copy of N.O.C. issued by the District Magistrate on 21.10.2020 has been filed as Annexure No.20 to the writ petition. In such order dated 21.10.2020, there is no mention of any objection by the L.D.A. regarding non-sanctioning of map.

¶9

The petitioner thereafter constructed the Petrol Pump and it started running in the year 2020 itself. The petitioner is a lease holder of the land which belongs to the respondent No.8. The respondent No.8 for some strange reason filed a complaint before the authorities regarding non-sanctioning of map for construction of Petrol Pump. The Assistant Engineer Enforcement, Zone-5, wrote to S.H.O, Gudamba, Lucknow to take action for alleged illegal construction raised by the petitioner. The letter dated 04.01.2023 states that the proceedings for sealing of the premises under Section 28-A (1) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 have been initiated.

¶10

The petitioner came to know of such proposed proceedings and, therefore, filed a compounding application along with the fee. Such compounding application was however, rejected. The petitioner has filed a revision before the State Government which was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the Vice Chairman to consider the compounding application afresh. Such compounding application was again rejected and the petitioner's revision against such application rejection of offer of compounding has been filed before the State Government, which is pending. In the meantime, proceedings under Section 28 A of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 were concluded and an order was passed against the petitioner. The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 28 (A) (4) of the 1973 Act before the Divisional Commissioner which appeal has been rejected. The petitioner has filed revision thereafter before the State Government which has also been rejected. The petitioner has challenged the orders passed on the compounding application of the petitioner and on appeal and revision under Section 28 A of the 1973 Act before this Court. It is the case of the petitioner that if the respondents are allowed to seal the premises during the pendency of the revision against the order passed on his compounding application, the petitioner shall suffer huge loss. It has also been stated that the petitioner having exhausted the statutory remedy of appeal and revision as available under the Act of 1973 against the order of sealing has approached this Court.

¶11

It has also been submitted further by the learned counsel for the petitioner that material worth several lakhs of rupees is lying at the Petrol Pump concerned.

¶12

We have gone through the pleadings on record.

¶13

Let a counter affidavit be filed by each of the contesting respondents within a period of two weeks.

¶14

Petitioners may filed their rejoinder affidavit within a period of one week thereafter.

¶15

List this case on 10.09.2024 .

¶16

Till the next date of listing, the sealing orders issued against the petitioner's Petrol Pump shall remain stayed.

¶17

It shall always be open for the revisional authority to decide the application for revision which is pending before it against the order passed for demolition of the premises by the L.D.A.

¶18

Order Date :- 20.8.2024

¶19

-Amit K-

¶20

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

Alok Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Special Secy. Deptt. of Housing and Urban Planning Lko. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alok Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Special Secy. Deptt. of Housing and Urban Planning Lko. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Khelawan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Urban Development U.P. Lko. and Others

Ritesh Kumar vs Union of India Thru. Its Secy. Ministry of Mines Shastri Bhawan and 4 Others

Narendra Kumar Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Urban Development Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Smt. Rashmi Singh vs Arvind Kumar Verma

Ravindra Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Housing and Urban Planning Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Rajendra Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Chief Secy. Lko. U.P and 3 Others