ANURAG PRAJAPATI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for petitioner, Mr. Madan Mohan Pandey, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. Manish Mishra learned Standing Counsel for the State and Mr. Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel appearing for the Lucknow Development Authority.

(2.) Supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner and orders dated 21.03.2015 and 24.12016 and two photographs showing present status of the constructions over the plot of the petitioner submitted by learned Additional Advocate General and learned counsel for the Development Authority are taken on record.

(3.) Petitioner, Anurag Prajapati, who is son of an Ex. Minister Gayatri Prasad Prajapati, has filed the present writ petition challenging order dated 205.2017 passed by the Chairman, Lucknow Development Authority, by which, his appeal has been rejected. Petitioner claims that his appeal has been rejected only on the ground that since show cause notice was issued to his father Gayatri Prasad Prajapati, and after hearing his father order of demolition was passed on 25.04.2017, and since his father has not filed any appeal against the said order, hence, his appeal is not maintainable. He claims that on purchase of land by three separate sale-deeds by the petitioner along with his father, on the entire land constructions were jointly made. Therefore, he is as much aggrieved by the order of demolition as his father. In the above circumstances, both the petitioner and his father have right to file their appeals. It is admitted at the bar, on pointing out by learned counsel for respondents, that petitioner on behalf of his father has also filed an appeal which is pending before the Chairman, as his father Gayatri Prasad Prajapati is in Jail for quite sometime. Though on the face of it the relief sought by the petitioner that his petition may be allowed on the short technical point and be remanded back looks innocuous but such a relief would be wrong to be granted in this extraordinary jurisdiction in the facts of the case and for the reasons detailed below.