news details |
|
|
| DB directs respondents to identify person responsible for disobedience of Court order | | Conversion of residential area into commercial at Roop Nagar | | Jammu, Sept 12 : In an Public Interest Litigation seeking alleged Conversion of Residential Area into Commercial at Roop Nagar Housing Colony, an application was filed by Vice Chairperson JDA seeking extension of time, clarification and modification of the directions regarding deposit of imposed cost imposed upon her by Division Bench.
A Division Bench of State High Court Comprising Justice Hasnain Massodi and Justice Tashi Rabstan after hearing SK Shukla for the PIL whereas Advs Adarsh Sharma and Sindu Sharma for the JDA, observed that On 27th March, 2014, this Court while noticing that order dated 10.11.2009 was not complied with by Vice Chairman, Jammu Development Authority granted last opportunity to comply with the said order by or before 15th April, 2014 subject to payment of Rs. 25,000/- as cost. On 02.09.2014, this Court was informed that order dated 10.11.2009 has not been complied with, resultantly, Vice Chairperson , JDA was directed to remain present in the Court on the next date of hearing along with Rs. 25,000/- imposed in terms of order dated 27.03.2014.
Division Bench further observed that Petitioners seek review of order dated 02.09.2014 on the ground that in the first place the order has been complied with, though this fact was not brought to the notice of the Court and consequently on the ground that the Officer manning the post of Vice Chairman, JDA on 27.03.2014 has since been transferred and therefore need not to be liable to deposit the cost and all other issues raised in the petition can be dealt with as the matter proceed.
In the event it is found that order as a matter of fact is complied with in terms of order dated 27.03.2014 well before the deadline or cut of date fixed thereto, petitioner would be free to seek return of the amount, if so deposited.
However, in the event, it is found that order dated 27.03.2014 has not been complied with before 15.04.2014, it is the duty of the respondents to identify the Officer responsible for disobedience of the Court order so that the such Officer is directed to deposit the amount and amount deposited be returned to the petitioner. (JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
