IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 714 of 2011 Rahul Sethia and another ….Petitioners Versus Additional Secretary (Homes), Government of Uttarakhand And another ..Respondents Present : Mr. Neeraj Garg, Advocate present for the petitioners. Mr. K.C. Tiwari, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand. Mr. Rahul Consul, Advocate present for respondent no. 2. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Heard Mr. Neeraj Garg, Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. K.C. Tiwari, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. Rahul Consul, Advocate present for Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority/respondent no. 2. 2. The petitioner has filed the writ petition stating that his shop was sealed by Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority way back in the year 2000 and although the State Government has passed an order in favour of the petitioner on 20.5.2010 under Section 41(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, the orders are not being complied with. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority Mr. Rahul Consul, on the other hand, states that the Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority has already moved a Review Application on 25.8.2010 against the order dated 20.5.2010 passed by the Additional Secretary, Awas, State of Uttarakhand, which is still pending. 4. The scheme of Section 41 says that the orders of the State Government have a binding nature on the development authority. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to move a representation to the State Government to dispose of the pending Review Application in accordance with law. In case such a representation is made, the State Government shall take a decision on it after hearing the development authority as well as the petitioner and other interested persons, as expeditiously as possible but definitely within a period of six weeks from the date such a representation is moved by the petitioner along with a certified copy of this order. 5. With the above observations, writ petition is disposed of. 6. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 29.12.2011 Avneet