Allahabad High Court
Tara Singh Bisht vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing ... on 2 March, 2023
Bench: Sangeeta Chandra, Manish Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1723 of 2023 Petitioner :- Tara Singh Bisht Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing And Urban Planning Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Devendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ratnesh Chandra Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for the Lucknow Development Authority.
This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers:-
"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no. 3 to decide the recall application dated 27.11.2018 filed by the petitioner against the ex-parte order passed in relation of sanction of map of related to the building concern, produced by the petitioner in pursuance of the direction issued under SHAMAN Scheme 2010, contained in Annexure no. 1 of the writ petition.
ii. Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties to maintain the status quo till the disposal of the recall application dated 27.11.2018 and also be directed to State Government to adjourn the case of petitioner till disposal of the recall application which is pending before the opposite party no. 3."
It has come out from the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, who appears for the LDA that an order of demolition was passed under Section 27 (1) of the Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as, the Act, 1973) by the Prescribed Authority. The petitioner filed an appeal against the said order which was rejected. The petitioner filed a revision, which was also rejected. Thereafter, petitioner has approached this Court in Writ C No. 8823 of 2022 (Tara Singh Bisht Vs. State of U.P. and others) wherein it came out that the order of rejection dated 25.11.2022 had been passed without calling for records as is required under Sub Section 3 of Section 41 of the Act, 1973.
This Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the order dated 25.11.2022 remitting the matter to the State Government for passing a fresh order in accordance with law after calling for record. The State Government was directed to decide the matter within a period of three months, provided there was no legal impediment and till then as is existed on the date of passing of the Court's order dated 04.01.2023 was to be maintained by the parties.
After such order was passed, all the records before the appellate authority and the Prescribed Authority were summoned by the State Government. The petitioner has filed an application for recall. He prays that his application for recall filed before the Prescribed Authority be considered on its merit.
As it has been pointed out by Shri Ratnesh Chadnra, the State Government has summoned all the records, the prayer as made in this petition cannot be granted to the petitioner. Let the revision be decided by the Revisional Authority within the time as provided by this court vide its order dated 04.01.2023.
It has also come out from the pleadings on record that petitioner had already filed his application for recall on 27.11.2018 against the order of rejection passed by the Prescribed Authority. Prior to approaching this Court in Writ C No. 8823 of 2022, he could have made such a prayer in Writ C No. 8823 of 2022 also praying for a direction to the Prescribed Authority to decide his recall application. However, he chose not to make any such prayer. For this reason also, the prayer as made in this petition cannot be granted.
In the result, the writ petition stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 2.3.2023 Nitesh