Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 41842 of 2019 Petitioner :- Shishir Kant Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohan Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kaushalendra Nath Singh
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Ravi Nath Tilhari,J.
Heard Shri Rohan Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the respondents no. 2 and learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents.
Shri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2 vehemently opposes the writ petition and submits that the Development Authority may be permitted to recover the defaulted amount from the assets of the company and in sold inventry.
However, he does not dispute the fact that the controversy involved in this writ petition has been heard and decided by this Court by judgment and order dated 4.12.2019 in the case of Rakesh Mahajan Vs. State of U.P. and others (Writ Petition No. 33100 of 2010). It is further submitted that the Rakesh Mahajan, Iftikhar Ahmad and Shri Suresh Kumar Garh were all directors of Nirala Developers Pvt. Ltd. and the petitioner was merely a director of Advancee Constructions Co. Pvt. Ltd. and the controversy involved was decided in the writ petition filed by Rakesh Mahajan earlier and thereafter by Iftikhar Ahmad and, therefore, this case be also decided on the same terms as the aforesaid writ petitions of Rakesh Mahajan and Iftikhar Ahmad.
The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed on the same terms and conditions as contained in judgment and order dated 4.12.2019 passed in the case of Rakesh Mahajan (supra).
The NOIDA Authority, as directed by this Court in other writ petitions, is at liberty to proceed with the recovery against the person from whom the amount has to be recovered.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019/sweta
(Ravi Nath Tilhari,J.) (Abhinava Upadhya,J.)