TARUN AGARWALA,J. - (1.) HEARD Shri Neeraj Garg, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rahul Consul, the learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) THE writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage, without calling for a counter affidavit since no disputed facts are involved. It transpires that proceedings for unauthorized construction and its removal were initiated u/S 27 (1) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act 1973 against one Umesh Kumar and, after issuing the notice to the said person, the Secretary Mussorrie Dehradun Development Authority passed an order dated 29th June, 2010 for demolition. Since the premises belonged to Shri Praveeen Kumar and not to Umesh Kumar, the petitioner instituted a suit praying for the quashing of the order of the Secretary dated 29th June, 2010 and, an interim injunction application was filed which was rejected by the trial court, against which, a Misc. Appeal was filed which was also rejected. The petitioner, being aggrieved, has filed the present writ petition. Shri Rahul Consul, the learned counsel appearing for the MDDA states that the order of the Secretary dated 29th June, 2010 was passed erroneously thinking that Umesh Kumar was the owner of the premises in question and when the authority realised the fact that Umesh Kumar was not the owner and that the petitioner Praveen Kumar was the owner, the authority rectified its mistake and issued a fresh notice to the petitioner u/S 27 (1) of the 2 Act for unauthorized construction and, after hearing the petitioner, the Secretary passed an order dated 15/09/2010 for the demolition of the unauthorized construction. The petitioner has preferred an appeal u/S 27 (4) before the Commissioner and, since no interim order was passed by the Commissioner, the petitioner preferred a writ petition No. 1944 of 2010 which was disposed of by an order dated 26/11/2010 directing that the building in question would not be demolished till the disposal of the said application by the Commissioner.
(3.) IN view of the statement made by Shri Rahul Consul, the learned counsel for the MDDA to the effect that the earlier proceedings initiated by the authority u/S 27 of the Act against Umesh Kumar was incorrect, consequently, the Court quashes all proceedings initiated against Umesh Kumar u/S 27 of the Act including the order dated 29/06/2010 and also dismisses the suit No. 297 of 2010 filed before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dehradun. Since the suit has been dismissed, the writ petition arising out of the interlocutory proceedings becomes infructous and is dismissed. Certified copy of this order shall be sent by the Registry within 2 weeks from today to the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dehradun to pass a formal order for the dismissal of the suit.;