Disposed

Dhanna Ram v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC13 Oct 2017CW/1405/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this single-line order, the Hon'ble High Court disposed of a stay petition and a writ petition concerning the allotment of a plot to the petitioner by the Jodhpur Development Authority, directing the Authority to consider the petitioner's representations within one month.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Jodhpur Development Authority to consider petitioner's representations and issue a speaking order within one month.

Dhanna Ram Vs State and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1405 / 2014

¶3

Dhanna Ram S/o Shri Gumana Ram, aged about 65 years, by caste Meghwal, resident of Magra Punjla, Kirti Nagar, Jodhpur

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

1 State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Department of Local Self Government, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶7

2 The Commissioner, Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur.

¶8

The Secretary, Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur.

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.S. Purohit

¶11

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Clhoudhary

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶13

Order

¶14

13/10/2017

¶15

The matter comes up for consideration of stay application.

¶16

with the consent of the parties, the matter is finally heard and is being decided today itself.

¶17

The petitioner, in this writ petition has claimed that his land was acquired by the Urban Improvement Trust, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as the ‘UIT, Jodhpur’) for the purpose of construction of the Ghantaghar Over-Bridge in the year 1973. The UIT, Jodhpur has decided to allot plot Nos.284, 285 and 286 in Sector-G, Extension Scheme, Masuria, Section-4, however, later on, in the year 2007, it was decided that plot Nos.315 and 304 of Vijyaraje Nagar, Jodhpur be allotted to the petitioner. Thereafter, again in the year 2008 the UIT, Jodhpur had decided to allot plot

¶18

(2 of 2)

¶19

[CW-1405/2014]

¶20

Nos.304 and 315 of Vijyaraje Nagar to the petitioner.

¶21

It is contended that after 2008, the UIT, Jodhpur which is now constituted as Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as the ‘JDA, Jodhpur’) has not proceeded with the matter and has not allotted the plot Nos.304 and 315 of Vijyaraje Nagar to the petitioner.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has filed various representations from time to time but till date, the JDA, Jodhpur has not taken any decision on the said representations for redressal of the grievances of the petitioner.

¶23

Learned counsel Mr. Rajesh Choudhary appearing for the JDA, Jodhpur has submitted that the representations filed by the petitioner from time to time will be decided expeditiously and a final decision in the matter will positively be taken.

¶24

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the JDA, Jodhpur to consider the representations filed by the petitioner, particularly the notice for demand of justice (Annex-7) filed by the petitioner through his Advocate, within a period of one month from the production of certified copy of this order.

¶25

The respondent-JDA, Jodhpur shall decide the representations of the petitioner by a speaking order.

¶26

Stay petition also stands disposed of.

¶27

(VIJAY BISHNOI)J.

¶28

Taruna

Dhanna Ram v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanna Ram v. State and Ors.

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

Babulal and Ors. Vs State of Raj. and Ors.

Dhigane Khan Vs State and Ors.

Raidhan Khan Vs State and Ors.

Om Singh and Ors. Vs the District Collector Shrigana.and Ors.

Gaji Khan and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Khan Mohd. Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.