Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PPER MOHAMMED versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Pper Mohammed v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 18532 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 5202 (4 March 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 5

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 18532 of 2006

Safee Mohammed  .........   Versus .... ... ... State of U.P. and others

------------

Hon'ble Janardan Sahai, J

The petitioner's eviction has been ordered in a proceeding under Section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act by the order of the Tehsildar.  The petitioner's case is that the proceedings were exparte and no notice was served upon him. The finding is that notice was served upon him. However, the matter is pending in the revision filed by the petitioner before the Collector Azamgarh. Counsel for the petitioner Shri J.J. Munir submits that the petitioner has filed a stay application in the revision but no orders have been passed on the stay application or in the revision and only a date 17.4.2006 has been fixed in the revision and in the meanwhile, the respondents are bent upon to demolish the petitioner's construction.

I have heard Shri S.K. Yadav, holding brief for Shri Anuj Kumar counsel for Gaon Sabha, respondent no.4 and learned standing counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3 also.

In the facts and circumstances it is directed that the stay application of the petitioner may be considered of by the Collector, Azamgarh on the next date i.e. 17.4.2006 and he may pass appropriate order. It is also directed that respondent no.3 the Assistant Collector/Tehsildar, Nizamabad, Azamgarh shall not demolish the construction of the petitioner if any standing upon the disputed land until the next date i.e. till 17.4.2006.  It is made clear that no opinion upon the merits of the petitioner's case is being expressed by this court and this order is being passed as an interim protection to the petitioner as it is apprehended that even before the consideration of the stay application in the revision the constructions may be demolished. It will be open to the Collector, Azamgarh to pass appropriate orders upon the stay application of the petitioner filed in revision in accordance with law without being influenced by the order restraining demolition being passed by this court.

 With the aforesaid direction this writ petition is disposed of

Dt. 4.4.2006

Sn


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.