HIMANSHU CHHABRA, S/O LATE SHRI KUNDAN LAL v. JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CW/10691/2025 · 2025-07-22
Anil Kumar Upman
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 23773 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 23773 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:27341] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10691/2025 Himanshu Chhabra, S/o Late Shri Kundan Lal, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Plot No. 52, Scheme Pashupati Nath Nagar, Village Chak Getor Tehsil Sanganer Jaipur. ----Petitioner/Appellant Versus Jaipur Development Authority, Through Its Secretary, Indira Circle, JLN Marg, Jaipur. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Anima Chaturvedi, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 22/07/2025
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notice under Section 32 of the Jaipur Development Act, 1982 (for short, ‘the Act of 1982’) was issued to the petitioner and same was assailed by the petitioner by way of appeal before the JDA Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur and that said appeal was disposed of vide order dated 02.04.2025 with the direction that petitioner shall file reply/objection to the notice issued under Section 32 of the Act of 1982 and authorities were directed to pass the order after giving opportunity of hearing. He submits that representation submitted by the petitioner was dismissed by the JDA on 07.05.2025 against that again appeal was preferred by the petitioner before the JDA Appellate Tribunal alongwith stay application. He submits that meanwhile, notice under Section 34 of the Act of 1982 was issued to the petitioner and same was challenged by the petitioner by
[2025:RJ-JP:27341] (2 of 2) [CW-10691/2025] way of separate appeal alongwith stay application. He submits that stay application has been rejected by the JDA Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 27.05.2025 without giving cogent reasons. He submits that till disposal of the appeal, rights of the petitioner should be protected. He further submits that construction raised by the petitioner is compoundable under the provisions of Sub-Section 3 of the Section 32 of the Act of 1982. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the nature of proceedings, I deem it just and proper to dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:- (i). Parties shall maintain status quo, till disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioner before the JDA Appellate Tribunal. (ii). It is also expected from the JDA Appellate Tribunal that appeal filed by the petitioner shall be decided expeditiously preferably within a period of four months from today.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/77