Allahabad High Court
Vikas Kumar Gupta vs Union Of India And 3 Others on 1 August, 2019
Bench: Bala Krishna Narayana, Prakash Padia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 4
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16445 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vikas Kumar Gupta
Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Girish Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.,Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri R.K. Jaiswal, learned counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2 and learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos.3 and 4.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer :-
"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent-authority to pay the compensation of the Gata No.317 Kha Area 0.0570 and Gata No.317Kha, Area 0.0280 situated in village Salemgarh, Tehsil Tamkuhiraj, District Kushinagar."
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner- Vikas Kumar Gupta is the bhumidhar of Gata No.317 Kha, Area 0.0570 and Gata No.459 Kha, Area 0.0280 situated in village Salemgarh, Tehsil- Tamkuhiraj, District Kushinagar (hereinafter referred to as the disputed plots) which were utilized by respondents in the year 2016 for the purpose of constructing bypass road to approach National Highway No.28. It is next contended that neither the disputed plots were acquired by the respondents nor any compensation has been paid by them till date. He lastly contended that even the representation filed by the petitioners before respondent no.4 on 6th April, 2016, ventilating their grievances, copy whereof has been filed as Annexure-5 to the writ petition, has not been decided till date and hence a direction be issued to respondent no.4 to decide the petitioner's representation pending before him within a definite period.
Per contra, Sri R.K. Jaiswal, on the basis of the written instructions received by him which were produced before us, perused and kept on record, submitted that no part of the disputed plots has been utilized by the respondents for the purpose of constructing bypass road and hence, petitioner is not entitled to payment of any compensation.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on record, we are of the considered view that the question whether any part of the disputed plots has been acquired by the respondents or not, is a question of fact which should be left to be decided by respondent no.4.
In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the writ petition with the direction to respondent no.4 to decide the representation dated 6th April, 2016 (Annexure 5), filed by the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, after affording opportunity of hearing to respondents.
Order Date :- 1.8.2019
Shalini
