Court No. - 36 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 37407 of 2010 Petitioner :- Nagendra Saraswat Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- S.S. Srivastava Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Sheo Kumar Singh,J.
Hon’ble Rajesh Chandra,J.
Argument is that although the demand is quite old but that is in the
name of the petitioner’s father and petitioner was not aware of the
aforesaid and as on date of petitioner’s father is no more.
Submission is that although entire amount of the rent stood paid but on
incorrect facts demand is there.
Be as it may, acceptance/rejection of the petitioner’s claim is
dependent on various factual aspect which this court may not go into.
For the aforesaid reason we are not to intervene in the matter but at
the same time we are proposed to pass the following order :
1. Petitioner is to move fresh representation before the respondent no.
4 stating his grievance.
2. On receipt of the move it will be concern of the competent authority
to attend the matter and pass appropriate order on merits in
accordance with law within shortest possible time preferably within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the move.
3. On passing of the orders , it will be for the petitioner to get the
needful done.
It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on merits
and thus while deciding the representation/claim of the petitioner it will
be independent exercise of the concerned authority to take decision.
With the aforesaid direction writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 1.7.2010
Sachdeva
