Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 135459 (ALL)

DELIP KUMAR TANDON AND 5 OTHERS v. ADDL. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, AMBEDKAR NAGAR AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/4519/2025 · 2025-04-25

Pankaj Bhatia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:23807 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4519 of 2025 Petitioner :- Delip Kumar Tandon And 5 Others Respondent :- Addl. District Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. 1. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging an order dated 27.02.2025 whereby the petition filed under section 21 of the Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 was rejected on the ground that the same was not in conformity with the prescriptions contained in Rule 7 of the Rules framed under the said Act. 3. The order impugned records that on the basis of the prescriptions contained in Rule 7 (1), it is prescribed that no application can be accepted unless it contains e-mail, whats-app and mobile numbers of the counsel and the scanned copy of PDF has not been sent to the tenant. The said reasoning as contained is clearly a misunderstanding of the prescriptions contained in Rule 7 of the Rules. 4. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that in case the application was wanting any particulars, it was open to the prescribed authority to have called upon the petitioner to furnish the details, according to the respondent authority, were missing. 5. The order impugned is clearly against the tenor of the Act which prescribes for expeditious disposal of the proceedings initiated under section 21, the rules as framed are only for advancing the cause of justice and cannot be used to frustrate the objects of the Act. As the order impugned is to be seen only on the touchstone of the requirements prescribed under Rule 7, as such, no notice is being issued to the respondent. 6. Finding the order impugned dated 27.02.2025 to be contrary to the mandate of Rule 7 and section 21, cannot be sustained and is accordingly quashed. The petitioner shall prefer an application after fulfilling all the requirements as are prescribed in Form No.7 and the said application shall be dealt with by the prescribed authority in accordance with law and the efforts shall be made to pass final order expeditiously preferably within a period of three months. 7. The writ petition stands disposed off. Order Date :- 25.4.2025 VNP/- Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench