Allahabad High Court
Laxman Singh vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 8 July, 2019
Bench: Bala Krishna Narayana, Prakash Padia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?
Court No. - 4
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21450 of 2019
Petitioner :- Laxman Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anuj Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 and Sri Anuj Pratap Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.5.
It appears from the perusal of the averments made in the writ petition that the petitioner claims himself to be Bhoomidhar with transferable rights of Khasra Plot No.166 Khasra No.388Sa Area 1-10-0 Bigha situate in Revenue Village Jahanpuri, Pargana and Tehsil Khurja District Bulandshahr (herein referred to as disputed plot). Several parcels of land of UPSIDC Lakhanpur, Kanpur adjacent to the disputed plot were acquired by the State Government in the year 1991. The petitioner's plot was not acquired. Respondent no.3- UPSIDC transferred the acquired land alongwith un-acquired plot of the petitioner to THDC in the year 2013. The grievance of the petitioner appears to be that although the possession of the disputed plot has been delivered by respondent no.3 to respondent no.5, but he has not been paid any compensation till date, despite repeated assurance given to him by the respondents. It also appears that the petitioner had earlier filed Writ C No.25768 of 2018 before this Court which was finally disposed of by order dated 1.8.2018 which runs as hereunder:-
"The grievance of the petitioner is that his land Khasra No.- 388 Sa Area 1-10-0 Bigha situate in Village- Jahanpuri, Pargana & Tehsil- Khurja, District- Bulandshahar has been encroached upon and occupied by the respondents without his consent and without acquiring it the petitioner has not been paid any compensation for the said land.
The petitioner, therefore, wants that proper compensation for the said land be paid him.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we permit the petitioner to move a representation in this regard before the respondent no.-2 Collector, Bulandshahar in accordance with the Government Order dated 12.05.2016 and it is expected that the District Magistrate could consider the same and after due verification if the land of the petitioner is illegally occupied by the respondents shall determine the amount of compensation admissible to the petitioner within a period of three months and ensure that the payment is made within a month thereafter.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly."
In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the petitioner filed a detailed application alongwith this Court's order dated 1.8.2018 before the respondents on 18.8.2018 and also sent a reminder on 5.12.2018, but when the concerned authority did not pass any order on the petitioner's application, they filed contempt application no.112 of 2019 before this Court in which notice was issued to respondent no.2 to show cause why contempt proceedings may not be drawn up against him and by the same order, respondent no.2 was granted one month's further time to comply with the order of this Court.
Respondent no.2 filed an affidavit of compliance on 11.4.2019 in which he stated that he had constituted a committee headed by Additional District Magistrate (F & R) Bulandshahr to examine the matter of the petitioner and had also sought a report from him in the matter. The S.D.O., Khurja, has submitted his report on 18.2.2019 and after examining his report, the Committee had taken a decision on 29.3.2019 to the effect that the petitioner's land shall be exempted from acquisition and its possession restored to him. A copy of the order dated 3.4.2019 has been brought on record as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. After the decision taken by the Committee on 29.3.2019, the petitioner moved an application before S.D.M., Bulandshahr, for mutation of his name in the revenue record, but till date, the petitioner's application for mutation has not been decided.
Hence, a prayer has been made in this writ petition to direct respondent no.2 to decide the petitioner's application dated 20.4.2019 pending before him within a stipulated period. The aforesaid prayer of the petitioner's counsel has not been objected to by learned Standing Counsel.
Since the facts of the case are not in dispute, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we are disposing of the writ petition finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties present at this stage of admission, with the direction to respondent no.2 to decide the petitioner's application dated 20.4.2019 (annexure no.6) pending before him strictly in accordance with law, by speaking and reasoned order within a period of three months from the date of production of this order before him, after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned.
Order Date :- 8.7.2019
Shalini
