Raj Deo Yadav vs State of U.P.and others

Rajiv Sharma, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order for seizure of administrative powers has been passed against the petitioner on the basis of an F.I.R. which has been lodged against him against which a criminal case was registered.

Counsel for the petitioner states that in the said criminal case, the petitioner has been granted bail and he has also informed the competent authority, by means of an application dated 19.12.2008 (Annexure 3), but no order has been passed by the District Magistrate concerned on the said application.

After arguing the matter at length, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not want to press the reliefs claimed in the writ petition, but restricts his prayer to the extent that the application dated 19.12.2008 pending before the District Magistrate may be directed to be decided by him expeditiously, to which learned Standing Counsel has no objection.

Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the case, the District Magistrate, Faizabad is directed to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, on the application dated 19.12.2008, which is pending before him, expeditiously, say by 15.6.2009.

With these observations and directions, the writ petition is finally disposed of.