2025:UHC:4219 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/1393/2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. A. P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. K. S. Mehta, learned Addl. CSC for the State. 3. Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel for the MDDA. 4. By the instant writ petition, petitioner is praying for the following relief: “Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari to quash the order dated 07.05.2025 sealing order as passed by the MDDA as being totally against the principles of natural justice, having no regard to the pending of appeals before the Commissioner, Garhwal who had called for a report from MDDA by 02.05.2025 and due to his non functioning in his judicial capacity, the matter is now listed on 28.05.2025. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Commissioner, Garhwal to expedite the hearing of Appeal No. 88 of 2025 pending before him.” 5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that against the office letter dated 15.04.2025 issued by the Joint Secretary / Prescribed Authority, petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, Garhwal in which, entire record has been summoned on 02.05.2025 and now, the matter is fixed on 28.05.2025. 6. Mr. Banshidhar Tiwari, Vice Chairman, MDDA, who joined the proceedings through V.C. informed to this Court that earlier construction was raised by deviating the sanctioned map and thereafter, compounding application was moved for residential purposes, however, since by raising the construction petitioner had raised construction by crossing the permissible limit, therefore, compounding application was rejected. Apart from this, Mr. Tiwari informs that construction is being used for commercial purposes. 7. Be that as it may, appeal is pending before the Commissioner, Garhwal wherein record has been summoned called and the matter is fixed for 28.05.2025. 8. Since the petitioner is praying for expediting the 2025:UHC:4219 Appeal no. 88 of 2025 pending before Commissioner, Garhwal, therefore, this Court is of the view that the Commissioner should expedite the appeal. 9. Mr. Banshidhar Tiwari, who appeared through V.C. also submits that let the appeal be decided by the Commissioner in its own merit by putting certain conditions. 10. In view of the submissions, as advanced by learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration the relief sought in this petition, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Commissioner, Garhwal to expedite the Appeal No. 88 of 2025 as expeditiously as possible, however, while expediting the appeal, the Commissioner shall provide opportunity of hearing to both the parties i.e. petitioner as well as representative of the Development Authority. The Development Authority shall provide all the relevant documents to the petitioner by 23.05.2025. 11. Since writ petition is disposed of, therefore, petitioner is restrained from raising any further construction till the appeal is decided. It is made clear that till the appeal is decided by the Commissioner, Garhwal, the Development Authority will not proceed for sealing of the premises of the petitioner, however, such restriction is subject to any further order passed by the Commissioner, Garhwal. 12. Subject to the above directions, the instant writ petition is disposed of finally. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 20.05.2025. SKS 2025:UHC:4219