Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 169093 (ALL)

MANJU DWIVEDI v. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE GAUTAM BUDDH NAGAR U.P. AND ANOTHER

WRIC/10097/2024 · 2025-03-26

Om Prakash Shukla, Rajan Roy

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:17459-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10097 of 2024 Petitioner :- Manju Dwivedi Respondent :- District Magistrate Gautam Buddh Nagar U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Madhavan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shobhit Mohan Shukla Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J. Heard. The money can be paid by the opposite party No.2 to the petitioner only when it is recovered by the Collector, Gautam Buddh Nagar, therefore, essentially the cause of action is against the Collector, Gautam Buddh Nagar. Had the money been recovered by the Collector, Gautam Buddh Nagar and sent to the opposite party No.2 and if it had not paid the money to the petitioner then the cause of action would be against the opposite party No.2, therefore, we are of the opinion that the recovery certificate, as it has been issued on 27.03.2024 by the Collector, Gautam Buddh Nagar and is to be given effect at Gautam Buddh Nagar, the cause of action does not arise at Lucknow. We have already dismissed similar writ petition bearing Writ C No.1232 of 2025 as not maintainable, therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable. It is open for the petitioner to approach the opposite party No.2 to find out the status of the recovery, if he so wants. If he approaches the opposite party No.2, he shall provide the status as to whether the money, after being recovered, has been remitted to the opposite party No.2 or not, within one week. The Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Om Prakash Shukla,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Order Date :- 26.3.2025 Saurabh Digitally signed by :- SAURABH VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench