Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Suresh Kumar Yadav Vs. Jabalpur Development Authority Th:its Chief Executive Officer

Suresh Kumar Yadav vs Jabalpur Development Authority Th:its Chief Executive Officer

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jul 27, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1046364

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Suresh Kumar Yadav

Advocate Shri. Vipin Yadav

Respondent

Jabalpur Development Authority Th:its Chief Executive Officer

Excerpt

w.p.no.10433/2012 (suresh kumar yadav versus j.d.a.) 27.07.2012 heard shri vipin yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. though the petitioner has raised several issues in the petition, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petition filed by the petitioner be disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the petitioner's representation, wherein he has requested for allotment of the vacant land adjacent to the land already allotted to him under the scheme no.18 of the jabalpur development authority. in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the representation of the petitioner is already pending before the authority since long, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the petitioner's representation expeditiously in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months from the date of furnishing a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition before the said authority by the petitioner. it is made clear that this court has not w.p.no.10433/2012 (suresh kumar yadav versus j.d.a.) expressed any opinion on the merits of the case not has any direction been issued to the authority to pass a positive order, and therefore, the authority would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the representation by passing a reasoned order. with the aforesaid direction, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of. c.c.as per rules. (r.s.jha) judge gn

Full Judgment

W.P.No.10433/2012 (Suresh Kumar Yadav versus J.D.A.) 27.07.2012 Heard Shri Vipin Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief.

Though the petitioner has raised several issues in the petition, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petition filed by the petitioner be disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the petitioner's representation, wherein he has requested for allotment of the vacant land adjacent to the land already allotted to him under the Scheme No.18 of the Jabalpur Development Authority.

In view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the representation of the petitioner is already pending before the authority since long, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the petitioner's representation expeditiously in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months from the date of furnishing a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition before the said authority by the petitioner.

It is made clear that this court has not W.P.No.10433/2012 (Suresh Kumar Yadav versus J.D.A.) expressed any opinion on the merits of the case not has any direction been issued to the authority to pass a positive order, and therefore, the authority would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the representation by passing a reasoned order.

With the aforesaid direction, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.

C.C.as per rules.

(R.S.Jha) Judge gn

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial