SECUNDERABAD CANTONMENT BOARD Vs. NARINDER KUMAR DHINGRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS review petition seeks review of the order of this Court in WA.No.44 of 2013 dated 22.01.2013. The writ appeal arose out of orders of learned single Judge in WP.No.21726 of 2012 dated 16.11.2012 dismissing the writ petition of the petitioner.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the Chief Executive Officer of the Cantonment Board had issued a notice dated 19.01.2011 to the respondents/writ petitioners under Section 248(1) of the Cantonments Act, 2006 (for short the Act) directing respondents to stop erection/re -erection of the building and remove unauthorized structures shown in column 4 of the schedule to that notice and as the respondents/writ petitioners failed to comply with the same, the further order of sealing the building was passed. The respondents contended that as against the said notice under Section 248(1) of the Act, an appeal was preferred before the appellate authority under Section 340 of the Act along with stay petition on 26.03.2011 and the same is pending, but no orders were passed on the stay petition or the appeal. The respondents had, thereafter, filed WP.No.21726 of 2012 questioning the letter issued by the Cantonment Board dated 07.07.2012 wherein the premises was sealed.

(3.) LEARNED single Judge, however, declined to grant stay and dismissed the writ petition. An appeal, being WA.No.44 of 2013, against that order, was filed by the respondents before the Division Bench, which was allowed by order under review in terms of Section 342 of the Act. On an interpretation of the said provision, it was held by the Division Bench that mere pendency of the appeal amounts to suspension of the order impugned in the appeal and the same, however, having been not taken into consideration by the learned single Judge, the appeal was allowed directing the Cantonment Board to remove the seal of the said premises and hand over the same to the writ petitioners/respondents herein. The Division Bench also recorded an undertaking on behalf of the writ petitioners that they will not make any constructions until the appellate authority disposes of the appeal.