Karam Ali v. Udaipur Municipal Council and 2 Others

Judgment & Order

: 21.06.2024

Whether fit for reporting : NO.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD J U D G M E N T & O R D E R(ORAL)

This present writ petition has been filed under article 226 of the constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:- i. Issue rule upon the respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or any other order/orders shall not be issued whereby directing the respondents to quash and cancel the cancellation notice, dated 29.08.2022, issued by the CEO, Udaipur Municipal Council. ii. Issue rule upon the respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or any other order/orders shall not be issued whereby directing the respondents to handover the vacant position of the Room no.3 at Ramesh Chowmuhani, Udaipur by evicting the respondent no.3 to the petitioner. iii. Make the rules absolute. iv. Call for records".

2.

Brief facts of the case is that the petitioner herein sought relief against the respondents for cancellation of the allotment of Room No.3 at Ramesh Chowmuhani Shed, Udaipur. The respondent without serving any notice cancelled the allotment of the room no.3. Hence this present writ petition.

3.

Heard Mr. P.Roy Barman, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent(s).

4.

Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned Sr. Counsel submits before this Court that CEO, Udaipur Nagar Panchayat issued memorandum dated 07.07.1997, by which it was made clear that the Chairperson, Udaipur Nagar Panchayat desires to give the stall of Ramesh Chowmuhani shed finally to the selected allottees through method of lottery to be held on 10.07.1997 in which the petitioner stood at SL. No. 25. Thereafter on 29.08.2020 issued notice to the petitioner stating that the Udaipur Municipal Council has decided to re-allot the stall to a 3rd party for Rs. 600/- and directed the petitioner to vacate the room within 07 days. Further stating that the allotment order will be cancelled without any correspondence.

5.

As seen from the record the petitioner is not in arrears. Thus, the allegations that the petitioner need to vacate do not have any weightage. After perusing the entire evidence on record, this court directs the respondents to permit the petitioner in shop no.3 in the premises where he has been granted in terms of the agreement dated 07.07. 1997. However, it is always open for the respondents to take steps in accordance with law, if they find any violation committed by the petitioner in this regard.

6.

With the above observation and direction, this present writ petition stands allowed and the impugned notice dated 29.08.2020 is set aside. Accordingly, the same is set aside. As a sequel, stay if any stands vacated. Pending application(s), if any also stand disposed of.

JUDGE

Paritosh SABYASAC HI GHOSH Date: 2024.06.29 13:39:46 +05'30'

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WP(C) No.208 of 2024 Karam Ali Petitioner(s) Versus Udaipur Municipal Council & Ors. Respondent(s) For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate. Ms. A. Debbarma, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. M. Debbarma, Advocate. Date of hearing and delivery of