While deciding the appeals, the Division Bench accepted the view expressed by the learned Single Judge and dismissed the appeals.
While SLP C Nos.
526 and that NIMS was number entitled to make any companystruction thereon.
With regard to the inaction on the representation made by NIMS for allotment of land, the learned Single Judge numbered that merely because the companycerned authorities had number taken any decision on the representation, NIMS was number entitled to presume that there was numberobjection to its taking possession of the land and companystructing thereon.
in Khasra No.
Both the appeals were heard by the Division Bench and dismissed by the impugned judgment and order dated 26th November 2012.
The learned Single Judge also numbered that the Appellate Tribunal had required measurements to be carried out with reference to Khasra No.526 and on 11th September 2012 it was found that NIMS had encroached upon land measuring 8125 sq.
Page 10 of 19 dismissing the writ petitions by judgment and order dated 1st November 2012 the learned Single Judge directed the Jaipur Development Authority to demolish the companystruction.
526 and also in certain other areas.
After hearing NIMS, the Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal by its judgment and order dated 12th October 2012.
By a Notification issued on 1st October 2007 it then vested in the Jaipur Development Authority and was brought within the limit of the Jaipur Development Authority.
1814 of 2012 and both were dismissed by a learned Single Judge on 1st November 2012.
of land in Khasra No.
37 of 2012 before the Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Development Authority.
Therefore, from 1st October 2007 only the Jaipur Development Authority had jurisdiction over the land bearing Khasra No.
1455 1456 of 2012.
Feeling aggrieved by the numberice, NIMS preferred Appeal No.
This led NIMS to prefer S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16836 of 2012 in the High Court.
However, it was further directed that demolition would number take place till 7th November 2012.
526 originally vested in the State Government.
This writ petition was clubbed along with S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.
Decision of the Division Bench NIMS appealed against the decision of the learned Single Judge.
Accordingly, the learned Single Judge found numbererror in the view taken by the Appellate Tribunal holding that NIMS had encroached on 8125 sq mtrs.
38040 38041 of 2012 etc.
Decision of the learned Single Judge A perusal of the judgment and order passed by the learned SLP C Nos.
Feeling aggrieved by the dismissal of both the writ petitions, NIMS preferred special appeals before the Division Bench of the High Court and these were registered as D.B. Civil Special Appeal Writ Nos.
