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


Mata Prasad v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 57709 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 17841 (17 October 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).


Court No.10

             Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 57709 of 2006                        

Mata Prasad . . . . . . . .  . .  .. . . . . .  ... . . . . . . . ...  . .  .  . .Petitioners.


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


Hon'ble A.K. Yog,J.

Hon'ble R.K.Rastogi,J.

This  is a writ petition for quashing the order dated 30.9.2006 passed by respondent no. 2 ( Commissioner Vindhyachal Division, Mirzapur, and the consequential order dated 5.10.2006 issued by Zila Panchayat Sonebhadra as also the proposal sent by Zila Panchayat Sonebhadra vide letter dated 8.9.2006 ( Annexures 1,2 and 5 respectively to the writ petition) and also a writ of mandamus directing the respondents no. 2, 5 and 6 to grant Patta in favour of petitioner  for 'Nauka Ghat' in question.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned  Counsel for the contesting respondents.

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 eight 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: 17.10.2006



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.