- (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings of the writ petition.
(2.) LEARNED Senior Counsel Sri Upadhyaya, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the impugned order dated 10.2.2010 (Annexure No. P -1A) is cryptic and vague and it does not refer to any provision or to any part of the Master Plan to show that the draft map submitted by the petitioner to the Lucknow Development Authority was in violation of the same. Sri D.K. Upadhyay, learned Chief Standing Counsel, appearing as Special Counsel for Lucknow Development Authority also agrees with the submission of learned Senior Counsel and, thus, submitted that this Court may quash the impugned order granting liberty to Lucknow Development Authority to pass appropriate order after giving opportunity to the petitioner to submit a representation and to personally appear before the Authority.
(3.) WE find the submission of Sri D.K. Upadhyaya fair enough and, thus, we quash the order dated 10.02.2010 (Annexure No. P -1A) and grant liberty to the petitioner in terms of the submission of learned Chief Standing Counsel to make proper representation within a week from the date of receiving copy of this order and on such a representation being submitted, the competent authority concerned of Lucknow Development Authority shall give a notice to the petitioner for personal hearing and thereafter will pass appropriate orders on merit within fifteen days while referring to the relevant provisions of the law applicable and the parts of the Master Plan relevant for the purposes of passing draft map submitted by the petitioner.;