Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11131 of 2018 Petitioner :- Vivek Interprizes, 207,West And Road Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 13 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Vaishya Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amresh Singh
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.
Heard Sri Raj Kumar Vaishya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Abhishek Shukla, the learned Standing Counsel.
This writ petition is preferred for seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent no.2 / Addl. Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly to decide Appeal no. 32 of 2005 (Computer Case No. C201712001393) (Sirajuddin Vs. Vivek Enterprises and others), within a stipulated period.
The learned Standing Counsel submits that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending, it be disposed of by giving appropriate direction to the authority concerned.
The writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent no.2 / Addl. Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly to decide Appeal no. 32 of 2005 (Computer Case No. C201712001393) (Sirajuddin Vs. Vivek Enterprises and others), either on the next date fixed, but not later than 3 months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that he shall not seek any adjournment and so also is expected from the private respondents, except for strong and compelling reasons, else would attract an exemplary cost of not less than Rs.250/- payable to the other side.
It is clarified that the proceedings as far as possible should not be repeatedly adjourned, merely on the ground that the Presiding Officer is busy in administrative work.
Service of certified copy of this order upon the respondent concerned shall constitute sufficient notice upon him to submit a compliance report.
The authority concerned shall submit Compliance report in Chambers on 16.8.2018 at 4:00 P.M.
Order Date :- 28.3.2018 / N.S.Rathour