- (1.) THE present writ petition has been filed questioning the legality of the order, dated 11.10.2004, Annexure -11 to the writ petition, on the ground that the reasons given for rejecting the representation suffer from manifest error of law inasmuch as the respondent -State Government has failed to take into consideration the provisions of Sections 6 and 12 of the U.P. Industrial Area Development Act, 1976 and Section 41 of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973.
(2.) WE have heard Sri Rakesh Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Sri Anurag Khanna, learned Counsel for respondent No. 4. The matter was taken up by us on 2.12.2004 on which date a request was made by the learned Standing Counsel for receiving instructions and then the matter was taken up on 8.12.2004, 10.12.2004 and finally heard on 13.12.2004 with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.
(3.) HAVING heard the learned Counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the present matter can be disposed of on a very short question as to whether non -consideration of the relevant provisions as referred to herein above vitiate the order, or not.;