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
19 paragraphs · 316 wordsManoj Kumar Tiwari, J
According to the petitioner, a complaint was made against respondent no. 6, who holds the office of President, Nagar Palika, Dehradun and, based
on the said complaint, an enquiry was held, in which it is recorded that prima facie, allegation made against the respondent no. 6 are found to be
correct.
It is the case of the petitioner that, pursuant to the Enquiry Report, a show cause notice was issued to respondent no. 6 on 5.08.2020 and
respondent no. 6 sought extension of time for submitting his reply.
According to the petitioner, the time extended for submitting reply has expired long back and it is not known to the petitioner whether respondent
no. 6 had submitted his reply or not.
By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:
“a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent no. 1 to take an immediate action in pursuance of the show
cause notice dated 05.08.2020 within an stipulated time.
b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent no. 1 to take immediate action in pursuance of the show cause
notice dated 05.08.2020 in exercise of the power under section 48 of U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916.â€
As per the case set up by the petitioner, due to inaction on the part of Competent Authority in taking decision in the matter, public interest is
adversely affected.
Having regard to the facts & circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to Secretary, Urban Development
Department to take decision in the matter as early as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of
this order.
It goes without saying that, while taking decision, respondent no. 6 shall be personally heard.