eLegalix - Allahabad High Court Judgment Information System ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - WRIT - C No. 37443 of 2011 at Allahabad Dated-21.10.20... Page 60 of 197http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do10/21/2011Section 4 read with Section 17(1) and 17(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act for acquiring 39.561 hectares of land,as published in the daily newspaper "Dainik Jagaran" dated 4.2.2010, situated in village Asdullapur, DistrictGautambudh Nagar. Declaration under Section 6 was issued vide notification 13.7.2010, which has filed asAnnexure-5A to the writ petition. Petitioners' case is that they are agriculturists and earning their livelihood fromagricultural land. Residential accommodation of the petitioner No.1 over Plot No. 156 is claimed to be valuedmore than Rs. 21 Lacs. Petitioners represented the matter before the respondent nos. 2 and 3 not to acquire theland. Petitioners' case is that although land has been acquired for Planned Industrial Development, but same hasbeen given to several private builders to construct residential accommodation. Petitioners claimed to be in actualphysical possession of the land. It is stated that there was no sufficient material for dispensing with the inquiryunder Section 5-A of the Act.Counter affidavit as well as supplementary counter affidavit has been filed by the State Government. It has beenstated in the counter affidavit that possession of the land was taken on 24.6.2011 of 22.432 hectares of land. Outof 122 tenure holders, no one has accepted compensation. It has been stated that since 103 tenure holders wereinvolved going through normal procedure would have taken to decide the objection, hence inquiry has beendispensed with. Writ petition has been filed with delay. Award has not yet been declared. Counter affidavit hasbeen filed by Noida Authority repeating the pleadings as has been mentioned in the counter affidavit of the StateGovernment. Possession is claimed to have taken on 24.6.2011.The writ petition in Group Group-43 relates Village Aleverdipur. Writ Petition No. 46470 of 2011 (Vinod KumarBindal Vs. State of U.P. and others) has been filed challenging the Notification dated 22.3.1983 issued underSection 4 read with Section 17(1) and 17(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act for acquiring 299.421 hectares of land,situated in village Aleverdipur, District Gautambudh Nagar. Declaration under Section 6 was issued videnotification dated 23.3.1983. Petitioner claimed to be purchaser from one Kalu by means of registered sale deeddated 31.5.2008. Petitioner's case is that he came to know only few days back that Noida authority has acquiredthe land by notification dated 22.3.1983 and 23.3.1983. Petitioner claimed to be in possession of the land aftersale deed and has come up in the writ petition praying for quashing the aforesaid notifications. Counter affidavithas been filed by the State Government stating therein that in pursuance to the notifications under Section 4 and6 of the Act, possession was taken on 26.8.1983 and award was also issued on 28.11.1984. Writ petition is highlybarred by laches and deserves to be dismissed, on this ground alone. Land having been acquired Kalu couldhave sold the property in favour of the petitioner. Original tenure holder has already received compensation andgot alternative site under scheme. Authority has also filed counter affidavit reiterating the pleadings as taken inthe counter affidavit of the State Government. Original tenure holder Kalu had accepted the compensation andhas also got residential plot No. C-22 in Sector-49 in the year 1997. Writ petition being highly barred by time,deserves to be dismissed.The writ petition in Group-44 relates Village Asgarpurjagir. In Writ Petition No. 46919 of 2011 (Girish Bansal andanother Vs. State of U.P. and others), counter affidavit has been filed by the state Government as well asauthority, which is being treated as leading writ petition. By the writ petition, petitioners has prayed for quashing ofNotification dated 24.8.2007 issued under Section 4 Read with Section 17(1) & 17(4) of the Act for acquiring17.415 hectares of land, situated in village Asgarpurjagir. Declaration under Section 6 was issued on 12.8.2008.Petitioners' case is that according to the Government Order dated 17.8.1993 and 8.8.1997 land is to be acquiredby negotiation and settlement. Reliance has further been placed on Government Order dated 8.2.2005 that forhousing purpose lands be not acquired where any construction is standing. Petitioners claim to be still inpossession over the land. Petitioner preferred an application dated 29.4.2011 by which petitioners requested therespondents to great their application for receiving compensation as rejected. Petitioners case is that inquiryunder Section 5-A of the Act has been wrongly dispensed with. Petitioners have not received any compensationtill date. On the land there is abadi of the petitioners. State Government has also filed counter affidavit statingtherein that in pursuance to the notification issued under Section 6 of the Act possession of the land was taken on16.1.2009 and 14.10.2009. Out of 144 tenure holders, 88 tenure holders had received compensation. Award hasalso been declared on 3.9.2011. Assertion is that abadi exists on the spot is not correct. No construction wasfound in 'Prapatra 17. Counter affidavit has also been filed by the authority in which apart from repeatingpleadings of State Government, it has been stated that writ petition has been filed with delay. There was sufficientmaterial available with the State Government for invoking urgency clause. Petitioner is not in possession of theland and award has been declared on 3.9.2011.Writ Petition No. 24295 of 2010 (Mawasi Vs. State of U.P.Thru. P.S. Industrial Devp. & Ors) has been filedchallenging the notification dated 24.8.2007 and 12.8.2008. This writ petition was filed on 29.4.2010 and interimorder was granted on 5.5.2010 directing for maintaining status-quo with regard to plot No. 183.Supplementary affidavit has been filed annexing copy of the lease deed dated 31.3.2009 by which land
JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - WRIT - C No. 37443 of 2011 at Allahabad Dated-21.10.20... Page 61 of 197http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do10/21/2011measuring 10951.98 Sq. Meter was allotted to M/s Anushriya Infotech Pvt. Ltd. for development of form house onagricultural land. Petitioner case is that land was acquired for planned Industrial Development and on Plot No. 183there is abadi of the petitioner. Petitioner submitted that an application dated 14.9.2007 had been moved beforeSub Divisional Officer for declaring the land as non agricultural. Petitioner has filed objection before the AdditionalDistrict Magistrate praying that petitioner's plot No. 183 in which he is owner 1/7th share be kept out of theacquisition. Petitioner's case is that Revenue Officer has written letter dated 24.11.2008 to the Additional DistrictMagistrate for transfer of possession of 17.415 Hectares of land of Village Asgarpur Jagir except the land whichwas mentioned in the schedule. Petitioner's case is that area of 0.69A hectares was mentioned in the scheduled,copy of which has been filed as Annexure-18 to the writ petition. Petitioner has stated that urgency clause hasbeen wrongly invoked by the State Government. In the supplementary affidavit, petitioner has brought on record,the lease for development of form house. Counter affidavit has been filed by the authority stating that writ petitionis barred by the laches. Possession of the land has been taken on 16.1.2009. It has been stated that since therewere 155 tenure holders, hearing their objection would have taken much time, hence urgency clause wasinvoked. It has been stated that possession of Plot No. 183 has not been taken.The writ petition in Group-45 relates to village Badoli Bangar, Pargana Dankour, Tehsil Sadar, DistrictGautambudh Nagar. In Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 38057 of 2011 (Ratan Vs. State of U.P. and others), counteraffidavit has been filed both by the State Government as well as respondents- authority, which writ petition isbeing treated as leading writ petition. By this writ petition, petitioner challenges the notification dated 7.11.2007issued under Section 4 read with Section 17(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act for acquiring 234.448hectares of land situated in village Badoli Bngar. Declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act wasmade vide notification dated 9.5.2008. Petitioner's case is that petitioner is Bhoomidhar in possession of Plot No.421 on which he has constructed his house. Petitioner's case is that he having using the land as abadi, samedeserved to be left out of the acquisition. Petitioner's case is that inquiry under Section 5-A of the Land AcquisitionAct was dispensed with without there being any urgency in the matter. According to Section 11-A of the LandAcquisition Act, acquisition has lapsed, since no award has been issued. Petitioner's case is that proposal wassubmitted on 24.11.2005 but the notification was issued only in November, 2007 which also shows that that therewas no urgency, no compensation has been received by the petitioner. Counter affidavit has been filed by theState Government stating therein that possession was taken on 2.6.2008. Out of 188 tenure holder, 149 tenureholders have received compensation. Award has also been declared on 19.9.2011. It is stated that in Plot No.421, no abadi was found in the survey. There was sufficient material on the record to invoke urgency clause. Inthe counter affidavit filed by the authority, plea raised in the counter of State Government have been reiterated.The authority has developed the village Badoli Bangar and spend huge amount on the development ofinfrastructure. More than Rs. 62 Crores has been spend on the development. Petitioner's case is that no allotmenthas been made in this village nor any development has taken place. Other writ petitions of this group raises moreor less similar grounds to challenge the notification which needs no repletion.The writ petition in Group-46 relates to village Basi Brahauddin Nagar, Pargana Dadri, Tehsil Dadri, DistrictGautambudh Nagar. In Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 44492 of 2011 (Manoj Yadav and others Vs. State of U.P. andothers) counter affidavit has been filed both by the State and the authority, which writ petition is being treated asleading writ petition. By this writ petition, petitioners have prayed for quashing the notification dated 12.4.2005issued under Section 4 read with Section 17(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act for acquiring 145.849hectares of land situated in village Basi Brahauddin Nagar. Declaration under Section 6 of the Land AcquisitionAct was made vide notification dated 6.10.2005. Petitioners' case is that possession of petitioners is there on partof Khasra No. 373. Petitioners plead that some of the plot of village in question have not been acquired onaccount of existence of abadi whereas petitioners has been discriminated since their plot having the abadi, havenot been released. There was no urgency for invoking Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act. Petitioners claimthat no notice has been served under Section 9 of the Act, the acquisition have lapsed under Section 11-A of theAct. Counter affidavit has been filed by the State Government in which it has been stated that possession hasbeen taken on 30.12.2005. Out of 1265 tenure holders, 752 tenure holders have received compensation. Awardhas also been declared on 29.12.2010. Writ Petition suffers from delay and laches. There was sufficient materialfor invoking urgency clause under Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition. Counter affidavit has been filed by theauthority repeating the plea taken by the State Government in its counter affidavit. It has been further stated thatdevelopment work has been carried out and the area in question has been demarcated as Sector No.67,68, and73. It has been stated that allotment have been made to private individuals for Industrial use and Institutional use.Petitioners are not in possession of the land. Writ Petition No. 46688 of 2011 (Mukesh Vs. State of U.P. andothers) raises more of less similar ground which needs no repetition.The writ petition in Group-47 relates to village Chaprauli Bangar, Pargana Dadri, District Gautambudh Nagar.There is only one writ petition being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.43392 of 2011 (Bhushan Singh and others Vs.State of U.P. and others). Petitioners have challenged the notification dated 21.7.2003 issued under Section 6
Page 1 and 2:
JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - WRIT - C No. 37
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10: JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - WRIT - C No. 37
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
show all

eLegalix - Allahabad High Court Judgment Information System ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?