Gurmel Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2018 Latest Caselaw 1951 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 29
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 27109 of 2018
 

 
Petitioner :- Gurmel Singh And Another
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushma Devi,Daya Shankar Prasad Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Heard Sri D.S.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned Standing Counsel has appeared for the respondents.

The petitioners have filed this petition for quashing the order dated 4.5.2018 passed by respondent no. 2 and for a direction to make payment of the acquired land according to the judgment and order dated 28.11.2016 passed in the First Appeal No. 430 of 1999.

It appears from the record that the land of father of the petitioners was acquired and in respect thereof an award was made on 3.9.1998. The petitioners or their predecessor in interest have not filed any reference against the said award. However, certain other reference under section 18 of the Act were decided on 3.9.1998. The judgment and order of the District Judge deciding those references was challenged by M/s Oswal Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. In first appeal before the High Court the said appeal and some other appeals were decided by the judgment and order dated 28.11.2016 and the rate awarded by the reference court was upheld.

The petitioners preferred a representation to make the payment of compensation to them according to the aforesaid judgment of the High Court.

The petitioners are not entitled to the benefit of the aforesaid judgment and order of the High Court as they were not party to any of the appeals which were decided by the High Court by the said judgment. Moreover, the petitioners or their predecessor have not even made any reference under section 18 of the Act and therefore, they are not even entitled to get any compensation as per the judgment of the reference court dated 3.9.1998. There is no averment in the petition that the petitioners have not been paid compensation as per award dated 3.9.1998 passed under section 11 of the Act.

The only grievance of the petitioners if any that remains is that the application of the father of the petitioners under section 28A of the Act is pending claiming enhancement of the compensation on the basis of the judgment and order of the District Judge dated 3.9.1998.

In view of the above, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief in this petition and they may if at all press their application under section 28A of the Act and get it decided in accordance with law most expeditiously.

The petition is accordingly dismissed.

Order Date :- 13.8.2018

Masarrat