IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1629 of 2011 Smt. Resham Panwar W/O Sri Chaudhary Feree Ram R/O 66-A Araghar, Dehradun. … Petitioner. Versus Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority, through its Secretary, 12 Pritam Road, Dehradun … Respondent. Mr. Piyush Garg, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Shobit Saharia, Advocate, learned counsel for the respondent. Date August 04, 2011. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. (Stay Application No. 8005 of 2011) Heard learned counsel for the parties. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 29- 7-2011 passed by the Secretary, Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority-respondent whereby sealing orders in respect of property of the petitioner have been passed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the same order has been assailed by the petitioner before the appellate authority, since statutory appeal is provided against the order passed under Section 28-A of the U.P.Urban Planning Development Act. The petitioner has filed this writ petition on the ground that the learned Commissioner, who is the appellate authority, is on leave at present and the matter is of urgency. The learned counsel for the respondent has informed the Court that the Commissioner is going to join on 8th August, 2011. In the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks interim relief not to seal the property in question till the disposal of the interim relief application by the learned Commissioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner on the basis of the instructions received from his client has stated at Bar that the 2 petitioner shall not raise any type of constructions over the property in question till the disposal of his interim relief application filed in appeal. Averments to this effect have been made in paragraph no. 29 of the writ petition. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate, has submitted that this writ petition may be disposed of as on today without inviting counter version from the respondent. In the above facts and circumstances, since the court of the appellate authority is vacant at present and as the learned counsel for the petitioner has stated at Bar that the petitioner shall not raise any type of constructions over the property in dispute till the disposal of the interim relief application by the appellate authority, therefore, in the interest of justice, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner is restrained from raising any type of constructions over the property in dispute and the respondent is restrained from sealing the property in dispute till the disposal of the interim relief application filed in appeal. It is made clear that in case of violation of the above direction by the petitioner, the respondent-authority would be at liberty to seal the property in dispute. The appellate authority is further directed to dispose of the interim relief application of the appellant-petitioner on merits in accordance with law after hearing both the parties expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order and shall also decide the appeal expeditiously as far as possible. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally. All pending applications stand disposed of. A certified copy of this order be issued to the learned counsel for the parties on payment of usual charges by tomorrow. (B.S.Verma, J.) RCP