Disposed

Smt.Ram Kanwar and Anr. v. the Jda,Jodhpur and Ors.

Rajasthan HC27 Nov 2017CW/15438/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held the writ petition was premature due to pending administrative proceedings regarding replies to notices. It directed the authority to pass a final order and restrained coercive action until then.

What did the court decide?

The Tehsildar (South) to pass final order after considering the petitioners' reply; no coercive action to be taken against the petitioners till the decision is passed.

Smt.Ram Kanwar and Anr. Vs the Jda,Jodhpur and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15438 / 2017

¶3

Smt. Ram Kanwar W/o Late Shri Suresh Kuri, Aged About 65 Years, R/o 13, Krishna Nagar, New Pali Raod, Jodhpur.

¶4

Shri Arun Kuri S/o Late Shri Suresh Kuri, Aged About 37 Years, R/o 13, Krishna Nagar, New Pali Road, Jodhpur.

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Jodhpur Development Authority, Through Its Secretary

¶8

Secretary, Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur.

¶9

The Commissioner, Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur.

¶10

Tehsildar (South), Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jamwant Gurjar

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶14

Judgment / Order

¶15

27/11/2017

¶16

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners being aggrieved with the notices dated 23.10.2017 and 09.11.2017 issued by the Tehsildar (South), Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur, whereby the petitioners are asked to stop the construction activities carried out by them in their residential plot without obtaining permission from the Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur. It is also mentioned in the notices that the action of the petitioners of raising construction is in violation of Section 31(1)(b) of the Jodhpur Development Authority Act, 2009 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the JDA Act’).

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CW-15438/2017]

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that as a matter of fact the petitioners are not violating any of the provision of the JDA Act as referred in the notice dated 23.10.2017 and only some alteration work is being carried out by them in the residential house, constructed way back in the year 1989. It is contended that the notice given by the Jodhpur Development Authority is void ab initio.

¶20

It is noticed that the petitioners have already filed reply to the notices dated 23.10.2017 and 09.11.2017 before the Tehsildar (South), Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur and the matter is still subjudice with the said authority.

¶21

In such circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition filed by the petitioners is premature, hence, no interference is called for at this stage. However, it is ordered that the Tehsildar (South), Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur shall pass final order in the matter after taking into consideration the reply filed by the petitioners to the notices dated 23.10.2017 and 09.11.2017 and till the said decision is passed no coercive action be taken against the petitioners.

¶22

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶23

Stay petition also stands disposed of.

¶24

(VIJAY BISHNOI)J.

¶25

Abhishek Kumar S.No.138

Smt.Ram Kanwar and Anr. v. the Jda,Jodhpur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Ram Kanwar and Anr. v. the Jda,Jodhpur and Ors.

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

Similar cases

Mahesh Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ramratan Agarwal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Shekhar Khatri Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sushila Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Chhoga and Ors. Vs Jvvnl Jodhpur and Anr.

Smt. Narayani Devi Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.