Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MUKESH KUMAR SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Mukesh Kumar Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 38552 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 13107 (7 August 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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

                    Court No.10

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 38552 of 2006                              

Mukesh Kumar Singh . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . .  . .  . . . . . . . . . .. Petitioner.

                                   Versus

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

        ----

Hon'ble A.K. Yog,J.

Hon'ble R.K.Rastogi,J.

The petitioner has approached to this Court under Article 226 of the constitution of India for a direction in the nature of mandamus  to respondent no. 3  to consider  revival of allotment of House no. S-1/32 (Sapna), Kailash Nagar Yojana  Vrindavan on lump-sum payment

Heard  the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the contesting respondents and perused the record.

The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to file a fresh and comprehensive representation along with certified copy of this order as well as complete copy of  the Writ Petition with all Annexures before concerned competent authority within three weeks from today and on such representation being filed, as stipulated above, the concerned  competent authority shall decide the same   within twelve  weeks of the receipt of the representation as contemplated  above, exercising its unfettered discretion on the basis of record before him in accordance with relevant Rules, Government Orders, Scheme/Policy after hearing the parties concerned without being influenced by any of the observations in this judgment since this court has not entered into merits of the present case.

Writ Petition is finally disposed of subject to the above directions.

No order as to costs.

Dated: 7. 8..2006

RPP.    


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.