R. K. Mittal vs State of U. P. - 2012 Supreme(SC) 2503

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2012 Supreme(SC) 2503

SWATANTER KUMAR, RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI
R. K. Mittal – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :- Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anurag Dubey, Adv. Mr. Shiv Ram Pandey, Adv. Mr. K.V. Viswanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.L. Taneja, Adv. Mr. V. Shekhar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Praveen Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Garima Prasad, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Adv. Mr. Premkumar Anand, Adv. Mr. Jaideep Gupta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dinesh Mathur, Adv. Mr. Nishant Menon, Adv. Ms. Priyanka Bharti, Adv. for M/s. Dua Associates, Advs. Mr. K.P. Sundar Rao, Adv. Mr. Wajeeh Shafiq, Adv. Mr. P. Tewari, Adv. Mr. C. Kumar Roi, Adv. Mr. R.K. Rathore, Adv. Mr. Keshav Thakur, Adv. Mr. Sumeet Lall, Adv. Mr. Arjun Garg, Adv. Mr. Ramkishore Singh Yadav, Adv. Mr. C.D. Singh, Adv. Mr. Vikrant Yadav, Adv. Mr. Jitendra Mohan Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Adv. Mrs. Shiel Sethi, Adv. Mr. Shrish Kumar Misra, Adv. Mr. Vinay Kr. Garg, Adv. Mr. Pahlad Singh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Gopal Prasad, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Munshi, Adv. Ms. Rachana Joshi Issar, Adv. Mr. Navin Chawla, Adv. M/s. AP & J Chambers, Advs. Mr. Sanjay Kapur, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Goyal, Adv. Mr. Sonal Jain, Adv. Mr. S.R. Setia, Adv. Mr. Arun Kr. Beriwal, Adv. Mr. L.R. Singh, Adv. Mr. O.P. Gaggar, Adv. Mr. Krishan Lal Taneja, Adv. Mr. Naresh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ram Swarup Sharma, Adv. M/s Mitter & Mitter Co., Advs. Mr. P. Parmeswaran, Adv. Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Arun Garg, Adv. Mr. Bijoy Kr. Jain, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Mishra, Adv. Mr. Praveen Chaturvedi, Adv.
For the Respondent:- None.

JUDGMENT :

1. This interlocutory application has been filed bringing out certain objections to the Scheme floated by the NOIDA in furtherance of this Court's earlier Order.

2. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and in continuation of our previous order, we pass the following directions:

2. The limitation of Rs. 50 lakhs annual turnover shall not be pressed by the NOIDA. However, it may ask for any documents such as no dues certification and issuance of certain other kind of certificates by the competent authorities like Health Department or Municipal Corporation, as the case may be, to show that during which period, the nursing home was run in the residential area.

3. The Scheme shall be operative and applicable to all the persons whose nursing homes, being run in the residential area, have been closed by the NOIDA in furtherance of this Court's order and they shall form a class by themselves.

4. The persons who have been allotted lands by the NOIDA previously under any Sc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2012 Supreme(SC) 2503

SWATANTER KUMAR, RANJANA PRAKASH DESAIR. K. Mittal – AppellantVersusState of U. P. – Respondent

SWATANTER KUMAR, RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI
R. K. Mittal – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent