Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J. - (1.) Heard Shri Akshay Mohiley, Advocate holding brief of Shri Rohan Gupta, appearing for the petitioner and Shri Pankaj Rai, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
(2.) In this petition, the following principal reliefs have been claimed:- "A) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 10.2.2012 and 17.2.2012 issued by respondent No.3. B) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.1 and 2 to initiate action at the appropriate level for issuing of utilization certificate to the institution of the petitioner. C) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.5 to issue utilization certificate immediately in pursuance of the Government order dated 4.9.2008."
(3.) The present writ petition was entertained on 15.3.2012 and on the said date the Court had proceeded to pass following order:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead Principal Secretary, P.W.D. Department, Government of U.P. Lucknow and Chief Engineer,P.W.D. Department, Lucknow as respondent nos. 6 and 7 in the array of respondents forthwith. Learned Standing counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 5. Issue notice to newly impleaded respondent nos. 6 and 7. Each one of the respondents is accorded six weeks time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within next two weeks. List thereafter. It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that under Government Policy which has been so issued for opening of institution at Asevit Vikas Khand, petitioner submits that his institution in question has been selected and thereafter first instalment of Rs. 10 lacs has been released. Petitioner is contending that he has utilized the said amount of Rs. 10 lacs and thereafter for getting second instalment, only after furnishing utilization certificate and after verification of the same proceeding was to be undertaken, and then only second instalment is liable to be released but authorities who are responsible for issuance of No Objection certificate and utilization certificate and are not carrying out verification proceedings, and are not discharging their duties on the pretext that till date requisite instructions from the Higher Officers have not been received. On one hand authorities are taking such a view and on the other hand petitioner submits that petitioner has utilized the said amount of Rs. 10 lacs, proceedings in spite of the fact that recovery has been made. Petitioner has contended that he is being metted with arbitrary and discriminatory treatment and for creation such a situation authorities are themselves responsible and petitioner is not at all responsible for such situation. Prima facie arguments advanced requires consideration by this Court and have some substance. Consequently, till the next date of listing no recovery shall be made from the petitioner's institution. Respondent nos. 6 and 7 at the point of time of filing counter affidavit shall give specific reasons as to why till date requisite instructions for issuance of certificate and Utilization certificate have not been issued.";