Gagan Deep Singh Sawhney vs U.P. State Industrial ...
2011 Latest Caselaw 2899 Del

*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                 LPA No. 513/2011

Gagan Deep Singh Sawhney                ....Appellant
                Through Mr. Sushil Kumar Jha, Advocate.


                  VERSUS

U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation
Limited & Ors.                               .....Respondents
                 Through

CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be
allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported
in the Digest ?

                               ORDER

% 30.05.2011

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

CM Nos. 10908-10909/2011 (exemption)

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

LPA NO. 513/2011 & CM No. 10907/2011 (delay)

This intra court appeal directed against the order dated

11th March, 2011, is barred by 16 days. However, we are not issuing

notice on the application for delay in view of the fact that the learned

counsel for the appellant has stated that he would file a writ petition

before the appropriate High Court having jurisdiction on the subject

matter. We accept the said submission.

2. It may be noticed that the appellant had applied for a residential

plot in Sector C-9, Tronica City, Ghaziabad in the State of Uttar Pradesh.

The said application was made to Uttar Pradesh State Industrial

Development Corporation Limited, which has it's registered office at

Kanpur and the project office at Ghaziabad (U.P.). Uttar Pradesh State

Industrial Development Corporation Limited is respondent No. 1 to the

present appeal and is located in the State of Uttar Pradesh.

3. In these circumstances, we are satisfied that the appellant should

not have filed the writ petition in this Court and should approach the

High Court having jurisdiction as the subject matter and the property is

situated in State of Uttar Pradesh. Accordingly, while accepting the

statement made by the learned counsel for the appellant, we set aside

the order dated 11th March, 2011, which was passed in limine and

without notice to the respondents and give liberty to the appellant to

approach appropriate High Court having jurisdiction.

4. The appeal and the application for condonation of delay are

accordingly disposed of.

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

CHIEF JUSTICE May 30, 2011 kkb