Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Smt. Rajesh W/O Sh. Jadveer Singh vs Jaipur Development Authority on 10 April, 2019

Author: Veerendr Singh Siradhana

Bench: Veerendr Singh Siradhana

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     BENCH AT JAIPUR

               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6708/2019

Smt. Rajesh W/o Sh. Jadveer Singh, Resident Of 12 Udai Nagar-
A, Bandhu Apartment G-1, Gopalpura- Ajmer Bye Pass, Jaipur.
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
Jaipur    Development         Authority,       Jaipur      Through        Secretary,
Ramkishore Vyas Bhawan, Indira Circle, Jln Marg, Jaipur.
                                                                   ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Neha Gyamlani for Mr. Bharat Vyas For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA Order 10/04/2019 While the petitioner has instituted the present writ application with a prayer for regularization of plots No. A84-B84, Krishna Nagar-Ist, Avadhpuri, Chak Sudarshanpura, Jaipur, as a policy decision of the State Government; petitioner has been served with a notice under Section 34 of the Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 (for short, Act of 1982), for removal of unauthorized temporary development.
Learned counsel for the petitioner did admit the fact that though the petitioner has been served with a notice aforesaid, but her claim for regularization has not been considered as per policy.
A glance of the Section 34 of the Act of 1982, would reflect that development of temporary nature carried out unauthorized, as indicated under Sub-section (1) of Section 31, one would be liable to the penalty.
(Downloaded on 27/06/2019 at 11:55:14 PM)
(2 of 2) [CW-6708/2019] Be that as it may, the petitioner is first required to respond to the notice, and thereafter, her claim for regularization may be determined by the JDA.
Accordingly, instant writ proceedings stand closed with a direction to the petitioner to respond to the notice and also address a comprehensive representation detailing out her claim within two weeks hereinafter.
In case, a representation is so addressed within the aforesaid period, the JDA is directed to determine the same by a reasoned and speaking order as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law; preferably, within a month from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order.
(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA),J Pooja /84 (Downloaded on 27/06/2019 at 11:55:14 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)