Jaipur: Rajasthan High Court has put an interim keep on the execution of arrest warrant of JDA Secretary Hem Pushpa Sharma and bailable warrant of Zone-12 Deputy Commissioner Sunil Sharma within the case of not giving plot in Prithviraj Nagar Yojana regardless of the order of District Consumer Commission No. 4. Along with this, the court docket has issued discover to the complainant and sought a reply. Justice Anil Upman gave this order on the petition of JDA Secretary and Deputy Commissioner.
In the petition, advocate Amit Kudi and others stated that when the District Consumer Commission had issued discover within the yr 2014, the petitioners weren’t employed in JDA. At the time when bailable and arrest warrants had been issued in opposition to the petitioners, the advocate of JDA was current within the fee. In such a state of affairs, he had offered the case on behalf of JDA, however even after that the fee issued arrest warrants in opposition to the present secretary of JDA with out giving adequate alternative for listening to. Therefore, the implementation of the fee’s order of issuing arrest warrant and bailable warrant must be stopped. Hearing on this, the only bench stayed the arrest and bailable warrants of the petitioners.
Read: Even after shedding the case in SC, possession of the plot was not given, JDA secretary arrested and summoned via JDC bailable warrant – Arrest warrant of JDA secretary
It is value noting that the District Consumer Commission had issued arrest and bailable warrants in opposition to these officers on the applying of complainant Shambhudayal Agarwal. The complainant was not given possession of the plot even after being a profitable allottee of PRN. In the identical case, the Consumer Commission on July 26, 2013 imposed a positive of Rs 2500 on JDA and directed to present the plot to the complainant in PRN itself. JDA challenged this order within the State Consumer Commission and later within the National Consumer Commission, however JDA misplaced at each locations and the choice of the District Consumer Commission was upheld. The Supreme Court additionally rejected the SLP of JDA on February 13, 2024. On which the complainant had requested the Commission to adjust to the court docket order.
