Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 154411 (ALL)

M/S BAJAJ FOODS THRU. PROPRIETOR SANJAY KUMAR BAJAJ v. CHIEF SECY. GOVT. OF U.P. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/7240/2025 · 2025-08-01

Manish Kumar, Rajan Roy

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44739-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7240 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Bajaj Foods Thru. Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Bajaj Respondent :- Chief Secy. Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Shanker Pandey,Rina Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. Heard. Petitioner seeks following relief:- "a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction commanding the respondent to immediately comply with the direction issued by the Infrastructure and Industrial Development Commissioner, Government of Uttar Pradesh, and vacate the premises belonging to the petitioner; b) Direct the Chief Secretary to take all necessary and coercive steps to enforce the order already passed and ensure the premises handed over to the petitioner." It is alleged that petitioner has purchased the premises in question in the year 1994 but since 1964 the opposite party no. 4 is inpermissive possession of the premises of which the petitioner is the owner and they are not vacating it inspite of a decision having been taken at the highest level in a meeting of the Infrastructure and Development Commissioner, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow dated 09.10.2023. Prior to it also, the District Magistrate, Saharanpur had written to the Divisional Commissioner, Saharanpur Division in this regard but nothing has been materialized. Counsel for the State says that opposite party no. 4 disputes the ownership of the premises by the petitioner. Be that as it may, these are not the matters to be adjudicated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner may seek remedy before the State Government which can get the facts verified and if it is possible take such decision on an application as stated has already been submitted by the petitioner vide annexure no. 10 to the writ petition but with expedition or on a fresh application being submitted by the petitioner hereinafter within two months of its receipt alongwith certified copy of it keeping in mind the Government Order dated 17.08.2009 issued by Chief Secretary with regard to the sanctity and binding nature of decisions taken in the meeting of Infrastructure and Development Commissioner, Government of Uttar Pradesh. If petitioner feels still aggrieved, he can approach the Civil Court or such other forum or Court, as may be permissible under the law. Petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 1.8.2025 Ashish Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench