CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2022) 08 UK CK 0077

Maladevi @ Malavati vs Vinay Shankar Pandey, District Magistrate, Haridwar

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 18 August 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Contempt Petition No. 258 Of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 389 words

Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J

1.

The petitioner in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1929 of 2021 has sought for execution of the order dated 29th October, 2021, passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court remanding the matter to the District Magistrate, Haridwar to reconsider the petitioner’s application, in accordance with law.

2.

The petitioner in WPMS No. 1929 of 2021, has prayed for quashing the order dated 30.08.2021 passed by the District Magistrate, Haridwar on the ground that the proposed site of the petitioner is within 2 Kms from M/s Krishna Filling Station and 5 Kms from M/s Shivalik Filling Station. While rejecting the application of the petitioner, the District Magistrate, Haridwar has relied upon paragraph 2 of the Government Order dated 26.04.2002 for rejecting the petitioner’s claim. It is was further noticed by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court that the said Government Order was quashed by the Division Bench vide order dated 13.08.2003 rendered in WPMS No. 252 of 2003. In that view of the matter, the District Magistrate, Haridwar was directed to reconsider the petitioner’s application.

3.

Mr. Parikshit Saini learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in spite of lapse of more than one year, no order has been passed by the District Magistrate, Haridwar. Learned counsel would further submit that the High Court of Uttarakhand vide Notification in Chapter 22 Rule 10A of the High Court Rules, has directed that in case no time limit is fixed by any Court or by any Bench of this Court, the time limit shall be eight weeks from the date of passing of the Order.

4.

Since the petitioner has not come forward with the prayer that the District Magistrate, Haridwar has not reconsidered his case or has rejected his case, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move before the District Magistrate within a period of 10 days from today to decide the matter afresh in terms of the order passed in WPMS No. 1929 of 2021 and in compliance of this Order. However, if he fails to do so within a period of 45 days from the date the certified copy of this Order is placed before him, the petitioner would be at liberty to file a Contempt Application.

5.

With such observation, the present Contempt Application is disposed of.