High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Savita Pandey v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 14412 of 2007  RD-AH 4700 (16 March 2007)
Hon. Anjani Kumar, J.
Hon. Dilip Gupta, J.
Heard counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel and also Sri Anuj Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.6.
In view of the order that we propose to pass, it is not necessary to invite counter affidavit.
The petitioner by means of the writ petition has challenged the order dated 29th December, 2005 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Harraiya, District Basti by which the earlier certificate issued in favour of the petitioner regarding his domicile has been cancelled.
The petitioner has categorically stated that the aforesaid order has been passed in the teeth of the principles of natural justice. From the narration made in the order it is also clear that no opportunity was given to the petitioner before passing the aforesaid order.
Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has also not been able to satisfy us that any opportunity was granted to the petitioner by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate before passing the impugned order. He has, therefore, suggested that the order may be quashed and the matter be remitted to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate for passing a fresh order after giving opportunity to the petitioner.
In such circumstances, we set aside the order dated 29th December, 2005 and direct the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Harraiya, District Basti to pass a reasoned order after affording opportunity to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of production of the certified copy of this order before him.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.