Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 42786 of 2018 Petitioner :- M/S Firoz Tanners Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shyam Lal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Our attention has been drawn that in similar facts the coordinate Bench in Writ C No.40544 of 2018 has passed the following orders:-
"Heard Sri R.R. Agarwal, senior counsel assisted by Sri Shyam Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashish Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 & 5.
Against the demand of Mandi shulk on hides and skins, the petitioner had preferred a writ petition before this Court which was disposed of on 20.1.2016 with the liberty to the petitioner to exhaust statutory remedy and to move an interim application therein.
The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in pursuance to the above order, the petitioner had preferred a revision before the Director-respondent no.2 on 7.4.2016 but till date it has not been considered and decided and straightaway the impugned recovery citation dated 20.9.2018 has been issued against the petitioner.
Sri Mishra on the other hand submits that the alleged revision application of the petitioner is not available on record.
Notwithstanding the above revision in continuation to it applications dated 5.5.2016, 1.10.2018 and 26.11.2018 were sent to the Director but even then no decision has been taken.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we dispose of the petition with direction to the respondent no.2 to consider the above revision petition and if it is not available, the applications as referred to above filed by the petitioner in accordance with law most expeditiously, if possible within a period of one month from today and for a period of six weeks or till the decision by the respondent no.2 whichever is earlier, the impugned recovery citation dated 20.9.2018 shall remain in abeyance.
The petition is disposed of."
In para 8 of the writ petition the petitioner has stated that he has also filed a revision, which is pending before the authority concerned.
In view of the above, we also passed the order in the same terms that the respondent no.2 shall decide the representation of the petitioner expeditiously preferably within a period of six weeks from today and till the decision is taken by the revisional court, the recovery proceeding in pursuance to the citation dated 20.9.2018 shall not be given effect.
Order Date :- 21.12.2018 Pramod Tripathi