Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Bablu Jaiswar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|04 February, 2021

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Abhishek Pratap, Advocate holding brief of Shri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel representing the Lucknow Development Authority.
The petitioner is an apartment owner situate at Goel Heights Apartments Welfare Society, Goel Heights Aparement, Faizabad Road, Anaura, Chinhat, Near Indira Canal, Lucknow. The said apartments were developed by the respondent no.4 and in terms of the provisions contained in U.P. Apartment (Promotion of Construction, Ownership and Maintenance) Act, 2010, Residents Welfare Society known as Goel Heights Welfare Society has been formed. The allegation in this petition is that there are certain irregularities which are being committed by the Residents Welfare Society.
The State Government has framed certain Model Bye Laws to be adopted by every Residents Welfare Society which have been published by a notification dated 16.11.2011. Model Bye Law 57 empowers the competent authority either suo motu or on an application to be made in this regard to inspect the building and accordingly to prepare inspection memo of the status of the building including the common area of facility and thereupon the competent authority is further empowered to take such action which may be deemed necessary by him. The Competent Authority has been defined under Rule 2(c) of U.P. Apartment (Promotion of Construction, Ownership and Maintenance) Rules, 2011, according to which the Vice Chairman of Lucknow Development Authority is the competent authority. Accordingly, in terms of Model Bye Law, it is the competent authority, which in our considered opinion, can redress the grievance of the petitioner raised in this petition. For the said purpose, the petitioner has already made several representations/applications to the competent authority/Vice Chairman of Lucknow Development Authority, however, as per the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner no heed is being paid to the said representations.
Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the claim of the petitioner, this writ petition is finally disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation/application for redressal of his grievances to the competent authority i.e. Vice Chairman, Lucknow Development Authority. On receipt of such application/representation along with certified copy of this order, the competent authority/Vice Chairman of Lucknow Development Authority shall take appropriate action which may be warranted under law.
It is needless to say that while acting upon the representation to be made by the petitioner under this order, appropriate opportunity of hearing to the Residents Welfare Society of the Apartment concerned shall also be provided. The decision under this order by the competent authority on the application/representation to be preferred by the petitioner shall be taken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of application/representation.
Order Date :- 4.2.2021 akhilesh/
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Bablu Jaiswar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
04 February, 2021
Judges
  • Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya
  • Manish Kumar