Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11713 (ALL)

ROHIT KUMAR NIRANJAN AND 2 OTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/2381/2025 · 2025-03-16

Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Nand Prabha Shukla

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:37278-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2381 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rohit Kumar Niranjan And 2 Other Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramanand Gupta,Santosh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order passed by the third respondent i.e. Chief Development Officer, Lalitpur dated 3rd December, 2024, whereby the recovery is proposed to be made from the petitioner on the ground that payments for strengthening of the pond were released without the work actually being performed at the pond itself. 3. The order impugned is challenged on the ground that various findings on factual aspects are returned without any service of notice upon the petitioner or any opportunity being granted to him to explain the circumstances. 4. It is submitted that the impugned determination of liability is clearly violative of principles of natural justice. 5. Learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents does not dispute the argument of denial of natural justice as the order makes no reference to either issuance of any notice or consideration of petitioner's reply in the matter. The learned Standing Counsel further submits that instead of keeping the matter pending, the authorities may be directed to revisit the matter. 6. In the facts of the case, we deem it fit and proper to provide that the impugned order shall be treated to be a notice to the petitioner, who shall be at liberty to reply the same annexing all materials in support of his claim within a period of three weeks. Such reply would be got examined by the third respondent and a reasoned decision in that regard would be taken within two months thereafter. 7. Till appropriate decision is taken in terms of above, no recovery would be made from the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of. (Nand Prabha Shukla, J.) (Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J.) Order Date :- 17.3.2025 Sushil/- Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad