Dismissed

Amrik Singh v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Rajasthan HC2 Aug 2017CW/2508/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a show-cause notice for eviction from a shop. Holding it premature, the court dismissed the petition as not maintainable, directing the petitioner to exhaust statutory remedies under Section 97A of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable; liberty was granted to file an appeal under Section 97A of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act.

Amrik Singh Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2508 / 2017

¶3

Amrik Singh S/o Shri Sardar Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o H.No. 11, Sikh Colony, Udaipur, Rajasthan

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan Through Panchayati Raj Department, Jaipur

¶7

Panchayat Samiti, Girwa District Udaipur Through the Principal Secretary, Administration & Permanent Establishment Committee

¶8

Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Udaipur

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deelip Kawadia

¶11

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Patel, AGC

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶13

Order

¶14

02/08/2017

¶15

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the notice dated 22.4.16 (Annexure-9) issued by the Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti, Girwa, whereby the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why he should not be evicted from the illegal possession over the disputed shop.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that a writ petition being SBCW No.10883/16 (Tushar Jain Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) involving identical questions already stands dismissed by this Court vide order dated 23.11.16. The operative portion of the order passed by this Court in Tushar Jain’s case (2 of 2) [CW-8308/2016] (supra) reads as under :

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CW-2508/2017]

¶19

“In my firm opinion, the writ petition is premature. If at all, the petitioner is aggrieved that he is a tenant in the questioned premises, he can always respond to the show cause notice and it is expected that such response/reply shall be considered by the respondents in accordance with law. Even thereafter, if any adverse order is passed, such order can be challenged by way of a statutory appeal under Section 97A of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is hereby dismissed as being not maintainable giving liberty to the petitioner to take recourse of the statutory remedy available to him. In the case, the petitioner files an appeal against the impugned action of the Panchayat under Section 97A within a period of one month from today, it shall be treated to be within limitation.

¶20

Stay petition also stands dismissed”

¶21

Accordingly, this writ petition is also dismissed in light of order dated 23.11.16 passed by this Court in Tushar Jain’s case (supra) in the terms indicated above.

¶22

(VIJAY BISHNOI)J.

¶23

Taruna

Amrik Singh v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amrik Singh v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jai Singh Vs Stat E and Ors.

Smt. Jayoti Bala @ Ekanki Vs Arvind @ Surendra and Anr.

Gautam Vs Union of India and Ors.

Suresh Kumar Saini Vs State and Ors.

Suresh Kumar Saini Vs State and Ors.

Bore Gram Sewa Sahkari Samiti Ltd. Vs State and Ors.