Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Uttam Chand Mittal v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 25053 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 9268 (9 May 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).


 Court no. 1

Civil Misc. Writ Petition no. 25053 of 2006

Uttam Chand Mittal . . . . . . .  . . . . . .  . . . .  . . . . .  . . . . . . Petitioner.


The State of U.P. and others . . . . . .  . . . . .  . . . .   . . . . .Respondents.


Hon'ble Yatindra Singh,J.

Hon'ble R.K.Rastogi,J.

There is a building  no. C-180 situate at Sector 12 THA residential colony Ramaprastha, Ghaziabad. It has basement, ground floor, first floor and  second floor. According to the petitioner he purchased the basement and first floor of the  said building. He has filed the present writ petition  for a direction to the respondents not to seal the basement of the petitioner.

We have heard  counsel for the petitioner, the Standing Counsel and Sri A.K. Misra for the respondents.

According to Sri A.K. Misra counsel for the Ghaziabad Development Authority  (GDA), basement is meant for parking vehicles  and it is not being utilized as parking place but is being utilized as  commercial place and this is the reason for sealing the basement.

The counsel for the petitioner submits that  the basement is not being  used  for commercial purposes but it is being used  as store. He has also made a statement before this Court that if in the  sanctioned plan basement is meant for parking vehicles only, then the petitioner will utilize the basement only as a  parking place.

Sri A.K. Misra has produced a photostat copy of the  sanctioned map of the said building which reveals that the basement is to be utilized  for parking vehicles. . It was handed over to Sri Siddharth Singh, counsel for the petitioner  

Considering the facts and circumstances of the  case, it would be appropriate that the petitioner may  file a fresh representation before respondent no. 3  incorporating  the undertaking  given before this Court within one month from today. In case  the representation is  filed, it  may be decided  by the  said respondent by a reasoned order at an early date,  if possible,  within three  months  from the date of receipt of the representation. The petitioner will  file  a certified copy of this order; necessary  documents and a duly stamped self addressed envelope along with the representation. The concerned   authority after taking decision will  communicate the same to the petitioner.

No further action will be taken against the petitioner till the representation of the petitioner is decided by the concerned authority. It is also made clear that in case the  petitioner's basement  has been  sealed then the seal will be removed after he  files the  representation containing the aforesaid undertaking.

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

Date: 9.5.06



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


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 |

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