AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 173 wordsS.K. Mishra, J
The allegation made in the present writ petition is that some persons are unauthorizedly constructing over the Nazul land. However, the petitioner has not arrayed them as party respondents.
Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, the learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the names of the persons have not been supplied to the petitioner by the authority in his application filed under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
We have perused the RTI application. The petitioner has prayed for the names of the persons, and the same have been reflected in Point No.8 at Page No.18 of the writ petition. Therefore, we are of the opinion that, in spite of providing the names of the persons to the petitioner, he has not arrayed them as party respondents.
Hence, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed being devoid of any merit.
Urgent certified copy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the parties, as per Rules.