Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PRASHANT VERMA versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECY. ENTERTAINMENT LUCKNOW AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Prashant Verma v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. Entertainment Lucknow And Others - WRIT TAX No. 533 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 828 (22 March 2005)

 

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.55

CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO.533 OF 2005

Prashant Verma. ....Applicant

Versus

State of U.P. And others. ....Opp.Party

...............

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

Present writ petition is directed against the order dated 10.11.2004 passed by State Government by which stay application of the petitioner has been rejected during the pendency of the appeal. By means of the Writ Petition No.141 of 2005 petitioner has challenged the recovery in pursuance of the citation dated 13.10.2004 and 16.12.2004. Aforesaid writ petition has been dismissed vide order dated 28.01.2005 by the following order:

"The Special Secretary, Tax and Revenue  Secretariat Lucknow, respondent no.2 had given good ground for not passing an order of stay contained in Annexure-6 to the writ petition.

We do not find any legal infirmity in the order. The writ petition lacks merit which is hereby dismissed.

However, in the interest of justice, we direct the respondent no.2 to decide the appeal in accordance with law within a month from the date a certified copy of this order is filed."

In my opinion, present writ petition is not maintainable. Aforesaid order dated 10.11.2004, which is subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition has been examined by the Division Bench of this Court and the Division Bench very categorically held that the Special Secretary, Tax and Revenue Secretariat, Lucknow had given good ground for not passing any order of stay contained in Annexure-6 to the writ petition and no legal infirmity in the order was found. In my opinion, order which has already been considered and held to be justified can not be challenged again in fresh writ petition.

In the result, writ petition fails and is accordingly, dismissed.

Dt.22.03.2005

R./


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.