# Mohd. Atique Ansari v. State of U.P. and others - **Citation:** (2004) 1 ILRA 106 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2003-08-13 - **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 34957 of 2003 - **Bench:** M. Katju, R.S. Tripathi - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/mohd-atique-ansari-v-state-of-u-p-and-others-40233 - **Pages:** 2 ## Headnote Constitution of India- Article 226Appointment-on compassionate groundcannot be claimed as a matter of rightpurely at discretion of the authoritiesbenefit of compassionate appointment extended to those-who taken compulsory retirement prior to age of 55 years-petitioner taken retirement prior one month from the age of supernuation-such appointment cannot be made. Held- Para 4 and 7 The representation of the petitioner for giving appointment to his son on compassionate ground was rejected by the impugned order dated 1.6.2000 on the ground that his father has retired on medical ground on attaining the age of 56 years and 1 months and his son was not eligible for grant of compassionate appointment. The grant of compassionate appointment can be ## Text http:\\allahabadhighcourt.nic.in INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2004 106 U.P. Cooperative Societies (Employees Service) Regulations, 1975 were not complied with does not commend to me for acceptance in view of the fact that the impugned order received consideration and approval of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Institutional Board Lucknow. 8. As a result of foregoing discussion, the petition fails and is accordingly dismissed in limine. --------- ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 13.08.2003 BEFORE THE HON'BLE M. KATJU, J. THE HON'BLE R.S. TRIPATHI, J. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 34957 of 2003 Smt. Mithlesh Jain ...Petitioner Versus State of U.P. and others ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Dilip Gupta Sunita Agarwal Counsel for the Respondents: Sri Pankaj Mittal S.C. Constitution of India-Article 226-Civil Law-whether commercial activities should permitted in residential area? Held-'No' Held- Para 5 In the present petition it has been stated in paragraphs 5 and 6 that in the residential area a shopping complex is being constructed and other commercial activities are proposed. In our opinion this is clearly illegal. We, therefore, direct that no commercial or industrial activity will be allowed to be carried on in the area earmarked for residential purpose in the Master Plan of Agra or of in any other city in U.P. If commercial and industrial activities are being carried on in any city in U.P. in the areas earmarked for residential purposes in the Master Plan of that city such activity must immediately be stopped by the authorities. (Delivered by Hon'ble M. Katju, J.) 1. Standing Counsel and Sri Pankaj Mittal may file counter affidavit within three weeks. 2. Issue notice to respondent no. 4 returnable at an early date. 3. The point raised in this writ petition is of great importance throughout the State of U.P. and perhaps in many other States as well. The grievance of the petitioner is that commercial activities are being permitted in the residential area of Agra. 4. We have had occasion to deal with such kind of complaint in earlier petition which came up before us. For example in R.K. Mittal vs. State of U.P. and others 2002 (1) UPLBEC 444 we have held that no commercial and industrial activity can be carried out in the areas earmarked for residential purpose in the NOIDA Master Plan. We are informed that in a large number of cities e.g. Lucknow, Agra, Kanpur etc. commercial and industrial activities are being carried on in the areas earmarked for residential purposes in the Master Plan of that city. In our opinion this is wholly illegal. The rules have to be followed, http:\\allahabadhighcourt.nic.in 1 All] Mohd. Atique Ansari V. State of U.P. and others 107 otherwise the rule of law will collapse in the country. If there are rules they must be obeyed, otherwise the rule should be scrapped. We have held in R.K. Mittal vs. State of U.P. (Supra) that there is a widespread malady which has infected our society, namely, that the people who are having money and power think that they are above the law. This notion is totally destructive of the Rule of the Law and can no longer be tolerated by this Court. Everyone is under the Law. 5. In the present petition it has been stated in paragraphs 5 and 6 that in the residential area a shopping complex is being constructed and other commercial activities are proposed. In our opinion this is clearly illegal. We, therefore, direct that no commercial or industrial activity will be allowed to be carried on in the area earmarked for residential purpose in the Master Plan of Agra or of in any other city in U.P. If commercial and industrial activities are being carried on in any city in U.P. in the areas earmarked for residential purposes in the Master Plan of that city such activity must immediately be stopped by the authorities. 6. Although this petition was only regarding Agra city we have decided to extend its scope suo motu to other cities in U.P. because we are informed that similar illegalities are being committed there too. 7. Let a copy of this order be sent by the Registrar General of this Court to the Chief Secretary, U.P. forthwith who will ensure compliance of this order. Learned Standing Counsel shall also send a copy of this order to the Chief Secretary, U.P. 8. Let a copy of this order be given to the learned Standing Counsel today free of charges. --------- ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 16.9.2003 BEFORE THE HON'BLE RAKESH TIWARI, J. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 46904 of 2000 Vijay Kumar ...Petitioner Versus Zonal Manager (N) Food Corporation of India and others ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri A.B. Singh Counsel for the Respondents: Sri N.P. Singh Constitution of India- Article 226Appointment-on compassionate groundcannot be claimed as a matter of rightpurely at discretion of the authoritiesbenefit of compassionate appointment extended to those-who taken compulsory retirement prior to age of 55 years-petitioner taken retirement prior one month from the age of supernuation-such appointment cannot be made. Held- Para 4 and 7 The representation of the petitioner for giving appointment to his son on compassionate ground was rejected by the impugned order dated 1.6.2000 on the ground that his father has retired on medical ground on attaining the age of 56 years and 1 months and his son was not eligible for grant of compassionate appointment. The grant of compassionate appointment can be