Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24463 of 2019 Petitioner :- R.K.D Public School Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Prakash,Alok Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
The respondent has passed an order on 08.05.2019 whereby the sanction of the map has been set aside on the basis of an inspection report dated 26.04.2019. Thereafter a consequential order has been passed on 29.06.2019, which the petitioner has challenged in this writ petition.
We find that the petitioner has filed a revision before the respondent no.2 but no action has been taken by the respondent no.2.
The grievance of the petitioner is that in case no interim order is passed in revision serious consequences will follow and the petitioner's construction will be demolished by the respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court does not issue an order the petitioner will suffer irreversible loss.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
The Supreme Court in the case of Mool Chand Yadav and another Vs. Raza Buland Sugar Company Limited, Rampur, and others (1982) 3 SCC 484 has held that if a statutory appeal or revision is filed and no interim order is granted on the stay application, serious civil consequences will follow and the appeal/revision will become infructuous. The relevant part of the judgment of the Supreme Court is extracted below:
"4. ....... ......................................But if orders are challenged and the appeals are pending, one cannot permit a swinging pendulum continuously taking place during the pendency of the appeal. Mr. Manoj Swarup may be wholly right in submitting that there is intentional flouting of the Court's order. We are not interdicting that finding. But judicial approach requires that during the pendency of the appeal the operation of an order having serious civil consequences must be suspended. More so when appeal is admitted."
Ordinarily this Court should not issue direction to the subordinate court/tribunal in view of the judgment of a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Ali Shad Usmani and others Vs. Ali Isteba and others, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB).
However, in the present case we find that in case the petitioner's application for interim protection is not considered, the civil consequences will follow. Accordingly, we direct the respondent no.2 to consider the application for interim protection expeditiously, if possible, within six weeks.
We grant liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh expedite application along with a certified copy of this order before the respondent no.2 within ten days.
Needless to say that we have not adjudicated the matter on the merit of the case and the respondent no.2 will pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.7.2019 MAA/-