Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 14627 of 2018 Petitioner :- Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manish Trivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Vikram Nath,J. Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ramanand Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent and Sri Vivek Sharan representing the respondent nos. 2 and 3.
The petitioner is a banking company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is running one of its branch at ground floor of building at Plot no. B-186 (Central Bank Road) Kamla Nagar, Agra. This branch is running at the said premises on a rental basis its owner being one Smt. Meena Agrawal. It appears that the said constructions of building were made in violation of the byelaws and land use. Accordingly steps were taken by the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad for demolition of the said construction.
Sri Vivek Saran, upon instructions, states that by order dated 16 March 2015 the owner of the building was required to remove the constructions on her own expenses or else the same would be removed at the expenses of the owner by the Avas Evam Vikas Parishad.
According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the owner of the building never informed the petitioner about the said demolition order and it appears that in the meantime the proceedings for demolition could not take place for some reason, however, in view of the order passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 18 July 2017 in a petition being Writ-C No. 31027 of 2017 (Amit Kumar Versus U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad and others), now the Parishad has geared up to demolish the constructions.
Sri Manish Trivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed before us a communication received from the Executive Engineer of the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad dated 18 April 2018 informing them about the demolition proceedings.
Before us the limited relief pressed by Sri Manish Trivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner is that some reasonable time may be allowed to the petitioner to shift their branch from the disputed building to some other suitable accommodation for which three months has been prayed for.
According to learned counsel for the petitioner, shifting will require at least this much time as the locker etc. of the customers have to be shifted after giving due notice to the customers and also for arranging suitable accommodation and getting it suitably renovated to make it workable for the branch to run.
The request made by Sri Trivedi appears to be reasonable.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we dispose of the petition granting three months time to the petitioner as prayed to vacate the building in question. Failing which, the respondent-Parishad would be at liberty to proceed with the demolition proceeding of the portion in occupation of the Branch of the petitioner Banking Company. For a period of three months from today, the Parishad may not demolish the portion which is in occupation/tenancy of the petitioner bank, however it would be free to proceed with demolition of the other part of the building to be demolished.
Order Date :- 25.4.2018 K.K. Maurya (Suneet Kumar, J) (Vikram Nath, J)