Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39034 of 2018 Petitioner :- Naveen Kumar Bhati And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Prakash Singh,Mahendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anjali Upadhya
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
The petitioners purchased a residential plot bearing plot no. 44 measuring 495 sq. meter situated in ETA-01 Block- B Grater noida village Sakipur/Rasulpur, district Gautam Budh Nagar from one Pallav and Associates Pvt. Limited and their names have been mutated on the property.
The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent no.2 has issued demand notice dated 3.1.5.2018 to ask extra money of Rs.7,25,175/- in four equal parts.
Our attention has been drawn to an order passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ C No.29710 of 2018 in similar facts and circumstances of the case. The relevant part of the order reads as under:-
"Admittedly, the petitioner has remedy of approaching the State Government under section 41(3) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 read with section 12 of the U.P. Industrial Area Development Act, 1976.
We are accordingly not inclined to entertain this petition against the order passed by the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, which is impugned in the present petition.
However, we dispose of this petition with liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate representation before the State Government under the aforesaid provisions alongwith an application for interim relief, as may be advised, and also accompanying a certified copy of this order. In case such representation / application are filed, the State Government (respondent no.1) will proceed to decide the interim application, if any, within a period of 10 days from the date of its filing and further proceed to decide the main representation within a period of two months from the date of production of the representation alongwith a certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance to law, after affording due opportunity, as may be admissible under law, to the concerned stake holders.
For a period of three weeks or till disposal of the interim relief application, whichever is earlier, no coercive measure be taken against the petitioner, pursuant to the impugned order."
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel, who has accepted notice on behalf of first respondent and Ms. Anjali Upadhya, learned counsel, appearing for the second respondent.
Having due regards to the facts and circumstances of the case, we dispose of this writ petition in the same terms.
Order Date :- 29.11.2018 Ram Murti