MUSTAKEEM Vs. NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Vivek Saran, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Yogesh Kumar Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Amit Malik, learned counsel appearing for respondents.

(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing the orders passed by revisional court dated 15.2.2008 (Annexure 9 to writ petition).

(3.) IN such circumstances, as there was a dispute between respondent No.1 and respondent Nos. 2 to 5 that who is the owner of property in dispute, in such circumstances, petitioner made an application under Section 30 Sub- Clause 2 of the Act No.13 of 1972 before competent authority to permit petitioner to deposit rent, as there was a dispute. The competent authority has allowed the application and directed petitioner to deposit the same in spite of the objection raised by respondents. Sri Hari Singh aggrieved by aforesaid order filed a revision but revisional court by the order impugned has allowed the revision and set aside the order passed by court below directing petitioner to pay rent to respondent Nos. 2 to 5. Hence the present writ petition.