Allahabad High Court
Dharm Dev vs State Of U.P. & 3 Others on 14 August, 2014
Bench: Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, Vivek Kumar Birla
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 42504 of 2014
Petitioner :- Dharm Dev
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Awdhesh Rai
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Heard Sri Awdhesh Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
The petitioner has come up complaining that the petitioner is being compelled to forcibly execute a sale deed and he is sought to be dispossessed from the land in dispute without their being any consent or acquisition in accordance with law.
Learned counsel submits that the impugned notification which has been circulated is also in relation to the holding of the petitioner and in such a situation, the petitioner deserves protection. The name of the petitioner finds place against plot no.11 at serial no.46 of the impugned notification.
Learned counsel submits that the petitioner's land has neither been acquired nor the petitioner has offered his land for being settled by negotiation. The contention is that this notice is invalid without any authority and is nowhere in conformity with either the provisions of the 2013 Act or in pursuance to the previous proceedings under Section 4 of the 1894 Act.
Learned Standing Counsel has obtained instructions and submits that the land of about 74 tenure holders is affected on account of construction of a road out of which 40 tenure holders have negotiated their land by way of settlement. The list of the said tenure holders has been provided by the learned Standing Counsel dated 14th August, 2014 signed by the Executive Engineer but we have been unable to find the name of the petitioner occurring in the said list.
It is thus clear that the petitioner does not appear to have given any such consent for negotiating the land with the respondents.
We have come across a similar matter of district Gorakhpur where also the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Gorakhpur has proceeded to publish a notice which is similar to the impugned order in the present writ petition and was put to challenge in Writ Petition No.27025 of 2014. A Division Bench of this Court had put to notice the respondents to show cause by 15th May, 2014 and the petition was ultimately allowed on 21st May, 2014. A copy of the said judgment has been made available to the learned Standing Counsel and the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Having perused the said judgment and having considered the instructions received by the learned Standing Counsel, we direct the respondent nos.2 to 4 to file their response in the matter explaining under what circumstances such a notice has been issued thereby compelling the petitioner to negotiate his land. One of the contention is also to the effect that the recital contained in the notice that the land is acquired is absolutely incorrect. The response shall also explain the same.
Prima facie in view of the aforesaid, the respondents cannot deprive the petitioner of his land without adopting the due process of law.
Consequently, until further orders we direct the respondents not to interfere in the possession of the petitioner over the land in dispute without leave of this Court.
Affidavits within three weeks.
List immediately thereafter.
This order is only in relation to the petitioner whose consent is stated to be not given in the matter.
Order Date :- 14.8.2014
Ajay
