ANJANI KUMAR, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) IN view of the order proposed to be passed, it is not necessary to invite a counter -affidavit. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being finally disposed of under the provisions of the Rules of the Court. In paragraph 45 of the writ petition, it has been stated by the petitioners that the copies of the reports and the documents, which have been sent by the District Magistrate, Additional District Magistrate and Executive Officer or Chairman of the Nagar Palika have not been supplied to him. The impugned order acknowledges the report along with a complaint of one Virendra Pandey, Mahamantri Hindu Jagran Manch, Fatehpur, which was received by the respondents along with the report of Additional District Magistrate with the comments of District Magistrate concerned, but admittedly these reports and documents have not been made known to the petitioners before passing of the present impugned order by the State Government. In this view of the matter, the impugned orders have been passed in utter disregard of the natural justice. This writ petition therefore, deserves to be allowed, without entering into the merits of the case only on the ground that the principles of natural justice have not been complied with. However, it will be open to the State Government to pass fresh orders after compliance of principles of natural justice.
(3.) THE writ petition, therefore, is allowed. The impugned order dated 26.11.2001 passed by the respondent No. 1, Annexure -11 to the writ petition, is quashed. There will be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.;