Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ASHOK SHARMA versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ashok Sharma v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 25411 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 9160 (9 May 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.34

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.25411 of 2006

Ashok Sharma

Vs.

State of U.P. & Ors.

Hon'ble Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.

Hon'ble Dilip Gupta, J.

This writ petition has been filed for issuing a direction to the respondent no.3 to transfer the Licence No.53 in the name of the petitioner in place of late Phool Badan Vishwakarma and permit the petitioner to operate the Saw Mill.

The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner purchased the Saw Mill from one Shri Phool Badan Vishwakarma on 5th September, 2003 for a consideration of Rs. 1,10,000/-. He dismantled the Saw Mill from the site and made an application for renewal of the licence in his name but no action has been taken on the said application.

Shri P.R. Maurya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued the matter at length but he could not satisfy the Court that if the licence of the Saw Mill is given for a particular site then whether it is permissible for the petitioner to get the renewal of licence for an altogether different site and  if the period of licence had expired long back, then whether the petitioner could make an application for renewal, since the licence had been in the name of deceased Phool Badan Vishwakarma. In such a fact situation, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition. The petition is accordingly dismissed. However, it will be open to the petitioner to move an application for grant of a fresh licence. If such an application filed, we request the authority concerned to decide the same in accordance with law.

09.05.2006

AHA


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.