ATIQ MALIK Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRAFULLA C. Pant, J. By means of this petition, moved under Ar ticle 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned judgment and order dated 05-05-2005 (copy Annexure-14 to the writ petition), passed by District Magistrate, Champawat. A mandamus has also been sought not to interfere in petition er's exercise of property rights over the property purchased by him through the proceedings taken by Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-11, Kolkata.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 4, Official Liq uidator, filed his separate counter affi davit. In said affidavit also it is stated that the request was made to the Dis trict Magistrate, Champawat in pursu ance to the order passed on 15-10-2003 by Allahabad High Court in company petition No. 77 of 1999 and appointing Official Liquidator for taking up of the winding proceedings. In the counter af fidavit, filed on behalf of the Official Liquidator, it is further stated that un der Section 10 (1) (a) of Companies Act, --t956, the jurisdiction vests with the Allahabad High Court relating to the properties of the company under wind ing process as its registered office is situ ated in District Kanpur of State of U. P. Relying on said provision, it is stated by respondent No. 4 that the present writ petition is not maintainable and the petitioner should have approached High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, for seeking the remedy in the matter.