Court No. - 90
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 41628 of 2019 Petitioner :- Rampur Public School Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Madhusudan Dikshit Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
We have heard Sri Madhusudan Dikshit, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the State respondents and Sri P.K.Jaiswal, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.
The limited relief prayed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is for issuing appropriate direction to the Chairman Rampur Development Authority/ Commissioner Moradabad Division, Moradabad (respondent no.2) to decide the stay application filed along with the appeal, under section 27(2) of the Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appeal has been admitted on 2.12.2019 in which next date has been fixed for 20.1.2020 but no order has been passed on the application for interim relief. He further submits that there is apprehension that the respondent will take coercive measure to demolish the structure in dispute.
Sri P.K.Jaiswal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.2 states no coercive action will be taken against the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the stay application along with the appeal filed under section 27(2) of the Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 may be directed to be decided within the a fixed time frame, to which learned standing counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.2 have no objection.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent no.2 to to decide the stay application along with the appeal, under section 27(2) of the Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. However, it is provided that till the stay application is decided no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner.
It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the claim of the petitioner on merits.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019/samz