Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

NIZAMUDDIN AND OTHERS versus MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Nizamuddin And Others v. Meerut Development Authority And Another - WRIT - C No. 13372 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 4559 (15 March 2007)

 

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

Hon. Anjani Kumar, J.

Hon. Dilip Gupta, J.

This petition has been filed for a direction upon the Meerut Development Authority, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as the ''Development Authority') to remove the seal put up by it in House No.71, Bagicha Mohammad Hussain, Shahpeer Gate, Meerut on 13th July, 2006 and for quashing the notices issued to the petitioner.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Bhupeshwar Dayal, learned counsel appearing for the Development Authority and Sri S.K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the Union of India. Sri Bhupeshwar Dayal has placed before us the notices issued to the petitioner under Sections 27/28 of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the ''Act') and has contended that the aforesaid seal has been put in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 28-A(1) of the Act and any person aggrieved by such an order can file an appeal to the Chairman. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, contended that the order under Section 28-A(1) has not been supplied to him as a result of which it is not possible for him to file the appeal.

Sri Bhupeshwar Dayal, learned counsel appearing for the Development Authority has, however, very fairly stated that in the event the petitioner makes an application to the Secretary of the Development Authority for making available a copy of the order passed under Section 28-A(1) of the Act, the same shall be supplied to him within a period of one week.

We, accordingly, dispose of this petition with a direction that copy of the order may be supplied to the petitioner within a period of one week from the date he moves an application before the Secretary, Development Authority and the petitioner, if so advised, may then file an appeal.

Date: 15.3.2007

GS-13372-07


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.