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


Shauraj Singh & Others v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 18193 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 6461 (9 April 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).


 Court No.35

   Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 18193 of 2007

Shauraj Singh and others


State of U.P. and others

Hon.R.P.Misra, J.

Hon.Shishir Kumar, J.

We  have heard Sri A.K.Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioners  and Sri Vivek Saran, counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 to 4.

The present writ petition has been filed against the recovery proceedings in pursuance of demand notice dated 24.2.2007 issued by respondent No.3 towards the payment of betterment fee.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that it was decided that no development charges will be taken.  Now from the record it is clear that no development has been made, therefore, nothing is to be paid by the petitioners.

An objection has been taken by Sri Vivek Saran, learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioners have got an alternative remedy by way of filing an appeal before the competent authority in view of Section 51 of the Uttar Pradesh Avas Vikas Adhiniyam, 1965.

We have considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties and have perused Section 51 of the said act.  Section 51 Sub Clause 4 states that "any person aggrieved against an order of levy or assessment under sub- Section (2), may file an appeal before the Tribunal within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed."

Clause 6 of the Section 51 also mention that an interim order, in case if an application is filed can also be granted or can be considered.

As the petitioner submits that there is no compliance of the Sub-Clause (2) of Section 51 has not been followed and no notice and opportunity has been given.

As there is a provision of appeal, the Tribunal has been conferred a power of granting interim order, in such situation, we are of the opinion, that various questions of facts are involved in the present writ petition, therefore, in our opinion, an alternative efficacious remedy is available to the petitioner, he may file an appeal as provided under Section 51 of the Act.    

In case, the petitioner files an appeal within a period of one week from today before the Tribunal and submits an application for granting interim relief, the appellate authority is directed to consider the interim application  first and to pass appropriate orders.

For a period of one week there will be an interim stay but subject to condition that if the appeal is not filed within one week it will be open to the respondents to recover the demanded amount.

In view of the aforesaid fact, the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.

No order as to costs.




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.