Dilip Kumar Agarwal vs Rajasthan Industrial ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 8118 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Writ Misc Application No. 63/2021

Dilip Kumar Agarwal S/o Late Shri Ratanlal Agarwal, Aged About 61 Years, R/o A-107, Riico Housing Colony, Abu Road, District Sirohi (Rajasthan).

----Petitioner Versus

1. Rajasthan Industrial Development Infrastructure Corporation Limited (Riico), Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur Through Its Managing Director.

2. The Advisor (Infra), Rajasthan Industrial Development Infrastructure Corporation Limited (Riico), Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.).

3. The Infrastructure Development Committee (Idc), Rajasthan Industrial Development Infrastructure Corporation Limited (Riico), Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.) Through Its Chairman.

4. The Chairman Cum Managing Director, Rajasthan Industrial Development Infrastructure Corporation Limited (Riico), Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.).

5. The Regional Manager, Riico Industrial Area, Abu Road, District Sirohi (Raj.).

                                                                   ----Respondents


For applicant              :     Mr Sanjeet Purohit
For petitioner             :     Mr Rajat Dave



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

                           Judgment / Order

24/03/2021

By this application, the applicant-respondents seeks

three months' time to extend the time limit, prescribed by this

Court while allowing SBCWP No.17592/2018 - Dilip Kumar

Agarwal vs. RIICO Ltd. & Ors. vide order dated 14.12.2020, to

(2 of 2) [WMAP-63/2021]

decide the second appeal preferred by the petitioner against the

cancellation of Plot Nos.C-330 to C-333 situated in Ambaji

Residential Colony, Abu Road.

Learned counsel for the applicant-respondents has

submitted that the direction issued by this Court vide order dated

14.12.2020 is being complied with in its true letter and spirit,

however, as the report of Infrastructure Development Committee

has not yet been received, therefore, the second appeal filed by

the petitioner could not be decided within the time prescribed by

this Court. Thus, it is prayed that the time limit for deciding the

second appeal may be extended for a period of three months.

Mr Rajat Dave, learned counsel for the petitioner has no

objection if the time to decide the second appeal is extended.

In view of the above and for the reasons stated in the

application, which prevented the applicant-respondent No.2 to

decide the second appeal within stipulated time, further three

months' time from today is granted to the Second Appellate

Authority to decide the second appeal.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

209-masif/-PS

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)