Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Raju Saini S/O Omkar Saini vs Jaipur Development Authority on 30 July, 2019
Author: Ashok Kumar Gaur
Bench: Ashok Kumar Gaur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10971/2019
Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari, Aged About 60 Years, S/o Late Sh.
Banwari Lal Tiwari, Aged About 60 Years, C/o Shop No. 4, F-191,
Subhash Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
Jaipur Development Authority, Through Its Secretary, Indira
Circle, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur.
----Respondent
Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10973/2019 Chandra Shekhar Goyal S/o Sh. Balgovind Goyal, Aged About 68 Years, C/o Pawan Misthan Bhandar, Shop No.1, Plot No. F- 188, Subhash Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur
----Petitioner Versus Jaipur Development Authority, Through Its Secretary, Indira Circle, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur.
----Respondent S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10976/2019 Abdul Wajid S/o Abdul Karim, Aged About 60 Years, C/o Shop No. 2, F-188, Panchsheel Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
----Petitioner Versus Jaipur Development Authority, Through Its Secretary, Indira Circle, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur.
----Respondent S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10983/2019 Kailash Kotia S/o Sh. Ramlal Kotia, Aged About 68 Years, C/o Shop No. 4 And 5, Plot No. F-188, Subhash Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
(Downloaded on 01/09/2019 at 09:43:19 PM)
(2 of 6) [CW-10971/2019]
Jaipur Development Authority, Through Its Secretary, Indira Circle, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur.
----Respondent S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10972/2019 Pradeep Kumar Bansal, Aged About 58 Years, S/o Sh. Munna Lal Bansal, Aged About 58 Years, C/o Shop No.5, F-191, Subhash Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
----Petitioner Versus Jaipur Development Authority, Through Its Secretary, Indira Circle, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur.
----Respondent S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10975/2019 Raju Saini S/o Omkar Saini, Aged About 45 Years, C/o Shop No. 3, F-188, Panchsheel Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
----Petitioner Versus Jaipur Development Authority, Through Its Secretary, Indira Circle, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur.
----Respondent S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10978/2019 Vineet Gupta S/o Sh. Shankar Lal Gupta, Aged About 35 Years, C/o Food Point, Shop No. 3, Subhash Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
----Petitioner Versus Jaipur Development Authority, Through Its Secretary, Indira Circle, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur.
----Respondent S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10979/2019 Smt. Prabhati Devi W/o Sh. Babulal, Aged About 55 Years, C/o Shop No. 2, Plot No. F-188, Subhash Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
(Downloaded on 01/09/2019 at 09:43:19 PM)
(3 of 6) [CW-10971/2019]
Versus
Jaipur Development Authority, Through Its Secretary, Indira Circle, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur.
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bharat Vyas, Adv. Ms. Neha Gyanlani, Adv. Mr. Lokesh Jangid, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kuri, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR Order 30/07/2019 The present batch of writ petitions is decided by a common order as the controversy involved in all these writ petitions relates to the order dt.21.06.2019 passed by the JDA Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur.
The petitioners in the petitions have approached the JDA Appellate Tribunal assailing the order dt.14.06.2019 passed by the JDA, Jaipur.
Mr. Bharat Vyas, counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners had approached the JDA Appellate Tribunal against the illegal and arbitrary action of the respondents and they were further aggrieved by order dt.14.06.2019, whereby the objections filed by the petitioners in response to notice issued under Section 32 of the JDA Act, 1982, was rejected and the JDA decided that the commercial activities which are carried on in the residential premises, are required to be stopped.
Learned counsel submitted that along with the appeal, the petitioners had also filed application for temporary injunction. Learned counsel submitted that on 21.06.2019, the JDA Appellate (Downloaded on 01/09/2019 at 09:43:19 PM) (4 of 6) [CW-10971/2019] Tribunal has refused to pass interim order and has observed that since the commercial activities are carried on, in residential premises, as such it would not be appropriate to pass interim order.
Learned counsel submitted that the JDA Appellate Tribunal has not considered the cardinal principles to grant interim injunction and there is no finding in respect of prima facie case, irreparable loss and balance of convenience. Learned counsel submitted that only by observing that the premises are used for commercial purposes, the Appellate Tribunal could not have passd such cryptic order. Learned counsel submitted that the JDA Tribunal has not only declined the prayer of grant of interim injunction but has also fixed the matter in the month of December, 2019.
Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners are rendered remediless and their prayer for interim relief could not have been declined in such manner as has been done by the JDA Appellate Tribunal. Learned counsel also tried to persuade this Court by referring to the order passed by the Division Bench on 04.04.2019 passed in D.B. Civil Writs No.13664/2016 (C-Scheme Vikas Samiti Vs. Jaipur Development Authority & Ors.) whereby the Division Bench had observed that noticee if feels aggrieved from the notices issued under Section 32 of the JDA Act, 1982, will be free to take all their defenses/representations to controvert the allegations.
Learned counsel also submitted that the Division Bench has also made it clear that whatever was observed in the order, the authorities were not to be guided or swayed by such observations and the noticee was required to take all the pleas available with (Downloaded on 01/09/2019 at 09:43:19 PM) (5 of 6) [CW-10971/2019] them and the JDA Authorities were also required to pass the order after taking into account the lawful defenses by passing a reasoned and speaking order.
Learned counsel submitted that the JDA Appellate Tribunal in fact has been swayed by the observations which have been made due to some affidavit filed by the Deputy Commissioner before the Division Bench and as such the Appellate Tribunal while deciding the injunction application, has not passed order after considering all the pleas raised before it.
Mr. Amit Kuri, counsel for the JDA submitted that the order passed by the JDA Appellate Tribunal, does not require any interference by this Court.
Learned counsel submitted that once the finding has been recorded by the JDA Appellate Tribunal holding that the commercial activities are carried on in residential premises, no necessity was there to assign any other reason, while declining the prayer of temporary injunction in favour of the petitioners.
Learned counsel further submitted that while considering the prayer for grant of interim relief, the Court is not supposed to pass detailed and reasoned order and the Court has to apply its mind to the facts of particular case. Learned counsel submitted that whatever action has been taken by the JDA is in accordance with the law and the petitioners cannot be given any interim protection even by JDA Appellate Tribunal.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
This Court finds that the order dt.21.06.2019 is passed in a cryptic manner. The JDA Appellate Tribunal has not considered the basic principles while passing the order on temporary injunction (Downloaded on 01/09/2019 at 09:43:19 PM) (6 of 6) [CW-10971/2019] application. This Court is not commenting on the merits of the matter, however, it is expected from the Presiding Officer of the JDA Appellate Tribunal that he should pass a reasoned order.
This Court further finds that issue with regard to establishing a prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss are also to be looked into while taking up the matter deciding the temporary injunction application.
This Court finds that the order dt.21.06.2019 is required to be set aside and the mater is required to be sent back to the JDA Appellate Tribunal to decide the temporary injunction application after taking into account the relevant factors and as such the Appellate Tribunal is also required to take up the matter in expeditious manner.
The order 21.06.2019 is accordingly set aside and the JDA Appellate Tribunal is directed to take up the injunction application of the petitioners on priority basis and an endeavour should be made to dispose of the injunction applications as early as possible but in no case later than seven days from receipt of copy of this order.
The applications for impleadment are not being considered as the matter itself is remanded back to the JDA Appellate Tribunal to pass fresh order.
Accordingly, the present batch of writ petitions stand disposed of with above directions.
A copy of this order be separately placed in each file.
(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J Ashish Kumar /369/152-155, 161-164 (Downloaded on 01/09/2019 at 09:43:19 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)