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


Jamil Ahmad Thru.His Wife Shanaz Begum v. State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Housing & Others - WRIT - C No. 31423 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 11993 (16 July 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).


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

Hon'ble Rakesh Sharma, J.

This writ petition was placed before this Bench on 11.07.2007 at 09.00 p.m. by the order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice as the matter was mentioned before His Lordship to be very urgent.

Shri Janardan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, who appeared before us, expressed his inability to produce any document which was necessary to determine the controversy involved herein. Shri Zafar Nayyar, learned Additional Advocate General along with Shri Vivek Verma, Advocate, appearing for the Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad had opposed the writ petition contending that it did not contain any Vakalatnama, affidavit, court fee. Such a petition was not even entertainable. The petitioner had not filed other relevant orders passed against him earlier.

Shri Janardan Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had prayed for some breathing period to complete the formalities but in the meanwhile, some interim order might be granted. He had given an undertaking that a full-fledged petition would be filed by today. Considering the helplessness of the petitioner and on the undertaking given by Shri Janardan Singh, we entertained the petition issuing certain directions to the respondents. Reasonable time had been allowed to the petitioner's counsel to make good the deficiencies.

Matter is listed today. No document has been filed. On behalf of the petitioner, Shri Shailendra has filed his Vakalatnama and prayed for adjournment with a further prayer to extend the interim order passed by this Court earlier. No explanation has been furnished as under what circumstances the earlier counsel has been changed and why the undertaking given by him has not been complied with. There is nothing on record on the basis of which the case may be proceeded with nor the other deficiencies, like Court fee, affidavit etc. have been removed. Only a Vakalatnama duly executed by the petitioner from Jail has been filed. The petition is legally infirm and is not entertainable under the Rules of the Court.

In view of the fact that the petitioner has taken the matter in a very casual manner, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The petition is accordingly dismissed. Interim order passed earlier stands vacated.

Shri M.C. Chaturvedi, Chief Standing Counsel and Shri Vivek Verma, Advocate, appeared for the respondents.




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.