Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 42802 of 2018 Petitioner :- Hasmullah Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailesh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohammad Mustafa
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard Sri Shailesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the first, second and third respondents and Ms. Afsaan Safavat, learned counsel for the fourth respondent.
The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition challenging the order dated 30.11.2018 passed by the third respondent namely Up Ziladhikari/Prescribed Authority Regulated Area, Naugarh, Siddharth Nagar on the various grounds contained in the writ petition.
It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has purchased a plot no.342 situated at Villae Belsad, Tappa Tharauli, Pargana and Tehsil Naugarh, Siddharth Nagar measuring area 252.8 square meter through registered sale deed dated 4.11.2009, copy of the sale deed is appended as annexure 1 to the writ petition.
It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the aforesaid plot was purchased by the petitioner for residential purpose. After the sale deed was executed the petitioner applied before the prescribed authority in order to sanction the map for his residence. Prescribed Authority sanctioned the map of the petitioner for ground floor, first floor and second floor on the various dates. Subsequently, the petitioner also constructed his house on the aforesaid plot for residential purpose in accordance with sanctioned map.
It is further stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that an application was moved by ruling party M.L.A. address to the District Magistrate, Siddharth Nagar making various allegations on the said application. The report was called for by the District Magistrate. Thereafter, report was submitted by the Assistant Sub Divisional Magistrate to the District Magistrate on 19.5.2018. The petitioner submitted his objection dated 18.6.2018. The objection raised by the petitioner was rejected by the third respondent and he passed an order dated 30.11.2018 directing to demolish the house within 30 days. Challenging the aforesaid order the present writ petition was filed by the petitioner.
A preliminary objection was raised on behalf of respondents that against the order impugned a statutory remedy is available to the petitioner to approach the State Government as provided under Section 15-A of the U.P. (Regulation of Building Operations) Act, 1958. It is provided under sub Section (1) of Section 15-A that the State Government may, at any time either of its own motion or on an application made to it in this behalf, call for the record of any case disposed of by the Controlling Authority for the purpose of satisfying itself regarding the legality or propriety or any order passed under this Act. It is further provided that the first proviso of Section 15-A of the Act, 1958 provide that before passing the order State Government will provide opportunity to the affected person.
In view of the same, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file an appeal within three weeks from today before the competent authority as provided under Section 15 (A) of the Act, 1958. The petitioner is also free to move an application for interim protection before the said authority. If the appeal is filed along- with the interim application within three weeks from today, the same shall be considered by the appropriate authority expeditiously.
We further direct that till the interim application is decided by the competent authority, the house in question shall not be demolished.
With the aforesaid directions, writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 20.12.2018 Pramod Tripathi