Deepak Kumar Tyagi v. Puneet Bhadauria
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Learned counsel for the Authority states that it is not in dispute that without any sanctioned map under Section 14/15 of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (in short "Act, 1973), the petitioner had raised construction over the plot in question. After…
- Para 77. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) September 19, 2025 SP/ SURYA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Judgment
Heard Shri Puneet Bhadauria, learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri F.A. Ansari, learned Standing Counsel for State respondents and Shri Tejaswi Misra, learned counsel for Ghaziabad Development Authority (in short "Authority").
The supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
The instant writ petition has been preferred for quashing the impugned demolition notice dated 12.08.2025 issued by respondent no.4.
Learned counsel for the Authority states that it is not in dispute that without any sanctioned map under Section 14/15 of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (in short "Act, 1973), the petitioner had raised construction over the plot in question. After getting knowledge of the said construction, initially in the year 2016 notices under Sections 27 & 28 of the Act, 1973 had been issued and premises were also sealed. Later on, a first information report had also been lodged. The petitioner had again tried to raise construction in the year 2021. At the time of carrying out demolition on 20.08.2025, the petitioner had given undertaking to the Authority that he would move appropriate application for sanction/ compounding as per law and accordingly demolition was deferred for one month.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, in this backdrop, states that some breathing time may be accorded to the petitioner to move appropriate application for sanction of map/ compounding in accordance with law. 2 WRIC No. 30860 of 2025
Considering the factual situation, we do not find any merit in the instant matter, which warrant any interference. However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that in case the petitioner moves appropriate application ventilating his grievances before the authority concerned within ten days, we hope and trust that the Authority shall pass appropriate order strictly in accordance with law in six weeks, thereafter.
Operative part
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) September 19, 2025 SP/ SURYA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 — ss. 14, 15.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.