B. K. Narayana, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Prashant Chandra, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Faisal Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.1 and Sri Ram Raj, learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the order dated 22.04.2009 (Annexure-1) and the subsequent orders dated 14.05.2009 (Annexures-3 & 4) passed by the Vice Chairman and the competent authority of Ghaziabad Development Authority by which the petitioner has been required to deposit compounding charges at the rates as revised after passing the compounding order dated 13.06.2008 and the consequent order prohibiting the completion of the constructions passed under Section 28-A of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973. Sri Ram Raj appearing for the respondents No.2 and 3 submitted that against the orders impugned in the present writ petition, the petitioner has already filed a revision before the respondent no.1 which is pending and as such, the revisional authority may be directed to decide the petitioner's revision expeditiously. Sri Prashant Chandra has submitted that the respondent No.2 vide order dated 13.06.2008 had compounded the alleged illegal constructions raised by the petitioner subject to the petitioner's depositing the compounding charges. Sri Prashant Chandra next submitted that although the petitioner has deposited the entire compounding charges as provided under the order dated 13.06.2008, the respondents are not permitting the petitioner to complete the construction in accordance with the compounding order and as such the a direction be issued to the respondents No.1 and 2 to permit the petitioner to complete the constructions as per the compounding order. Sri Prashant Chandra next submitted that he has no objection to a direction being issued to the revisional authority to decide his revision within a specified period of time provided the interest of the petitioner is protected till the revision is decided by the State Government. He has also made a prayer that since the revisional authority is not allowing the parties to be represented through counsel, a direction be issued to the revisional authority/ respondent No.1 to allow the parties to appear before him through advocates. Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is finally disposed of with the following directions:- 1. The petitioner shall file a certified copy of this order before the respondent No.1 within a week from today.
(2.) THE respondent No.1 shall decide the revision preferred by the petitioner against the orders dated 22.04.2009 and 14.05.2009 passed by the Vice Chairman and the competent authority of Ghaziabad Development Authority within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The parties shall be permitted to appear before the respondent No.1 through advocates. For a period of three months or till the revision preferred by the petitioner is decided by the respondent No.1, the implementation of the orders dated 22.04.2009 (Annexure-1) and 14.05.2009 (Annexures-3 & 4) passed by the Vice Chairman and the competent authority of Ghaziabad Development Authority shall remain stayed and the petitioner shall be permitted to carry out the constructions strictly in accordance with the compounding order dated 13.06.2008. If while raising any constructions, the petitioner goes beyond the compounding order dated 13.06.2008, the respondents shall be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.;