Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18540 of 2019 Petitioner :- Manorma Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Mishra,Ashish Jaiswal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kartikeya Saran
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Heard Sri Dinesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Devesh Saxena holding brief of Sri Kartikeya Saran, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has come to this Court challenging the order dated 1.5.2019 by which the petitioner has been informed that in case the petitioner submits a fresh application for sanction of map, the same shall be considered after deposit of the due amount. It is submitted that the petitioner had earlier applied for sanction of map but due to his illness he could not deposit the amount and after some time made an application for accepting the amount for sanction of map which it it submitted was deposited on 22.6.2018, 12.7.2018 and 21.8.2018. The said amount was deposited along with interest but thereafter the map was not being sanctioned. Therefore, the petitioner had to file a writ petition before this Court being writ petition No.9570 of 2019 which was disposed of on 15.3.2019 with a direction to the authority to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order.
By the impugned order, it has been stated that once the petitioner did not deposit the amount after making an application for sanction of map, his map was already cancelled and, therefore any amount that has been deposited by the petitioner subsequently, the petitioner is entitled to refund of the amount and then he may move a fresh application which shall be considered.
It is not disputed by the authority that the entire amount has already been deposited by the petitioner . However, a direction has been issued to re-submit the application for sanction of map after claiming the refund of the amount. In our view, why the petitioner should be put to such a harassment. Once the amount has already been deposited and if any extra amount is required , then the petitioner can deposit the same and thereafter his application for sanction of map may be considered.
The writ petition is disposed of by quashing the impugned order dated 1.5.2019 with a direction that the amount already deposited by the petitioner shall be adjusted and any further legitimate demand made by the authority shall be deposited by the petitioner and thereafter the petitioner will move a fresh application for sanction of the map. The authority concerned shall consider and decide the fresh application of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date a fresh application along with a certified copy of the order is presented by the petitioner.
The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent.
Order Date :- 30.5.2019 VPC (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J) (Abhinava Upadhya,J)