Pala Singh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 11370 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 39
 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16072 of 2022
 
Petitioner :- Pala Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Raj Narayan Tiwari
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anjali Upadhya
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.

Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Anjali Upadhyay for the respondent authority.

By means of the present petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 10.06.2020 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Greater NOIDA whereby the application moved by the petitioner for regularisation of Abadi existing over the plot nos.663 and 730 has been rejected.

Another prayer in the writ petition is for quashing of the award dated 10.07.2015 purpotedly passed under Section 11(2) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with respect to plot no.663 area 0.3857 hectares of Village-Patwari, Tehsil-Dadri District-Gautam buddh Nagar.

A further prayer is to release back Abadi land bearing plot no.663 area as mentioned above.

Pressing these prayers, it is vehemently argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that compensation paid to the petitioner for the plots in question i.e plot nos.663 and 730 had been recovered back in the year, 2014 for the fact that Abadi existed over the said plots. The request of the petitioner to regularize the existing Abadi in terms of Greater NOIDA Industrial Development Abadi Sites (Management and Regularisation) Regulations 2015, thus could not have been rejected. He further argued that the award dated 10.07.2015 passed under Section 11(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was an illegal exercise, in as much as, no agreement was arrived with respect to Abadi existing over plot nos.730 and 663. As no agreement was arrived, the award could have been declared under Section 11(2) of the Act, 1894.

Testing these submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, we may note that the petitioner herein has filed a writ petition (C) no.3760 of 2020 before this Court on the prayer made as follows:-

"I. a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.3 of pass an appropriate order on the representation of the petitioner dated 15.11.2016 pending for regularisation of his abadi under the provisions of Greater NOIDA Industrial Development Rural Abadi Sites (Management and Regularization) (First Amendment) Regulation, 2015 in respect of abadi situated over the land of Gata No.730 area 1.5490 hectare and Gata no.663 area 1.5430 hectare (1/4 share) in Village Patwari, Post and Tehsil Dadari, District Gautam Budh Nagar within time bound period which may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

II. a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.3 to not create any third party interest over the land of Gata No.730 area 1.5490 hectare and Gata no.663 area 1.5430 hectare (1/4 share) in Village Patwari, Post and Tehsil Dadari, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

III. any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

The said writ petition was decided vide order dated 04.02.2020 with the following directions:-

"Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to make a fresh representation before the Respondent No.3,Chief Executive Officer, Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, ventilating his grievances within two weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order enclosing therewith a copy of the writ petition and its entire Annexures and, if any such representation is made, the said authority shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law after examining the entire matter by a speaking and reasoned order within six weeks from the date of receipt of the said representation."

On receipt of the representation, the order impugned dated 10.06.2020 has been passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Greater NOIDA wherein it is recorded that the total acquired land belonging to the petitioner and other tenureholders comprising in two khatas namely Khata no.274 (comprising of Gata no.102, 347, 539, 730 and 157? total area 5.0280 hectares; and khata no.641 comprising of Gata no.663 area 1.5430 hectares. The acquisition notifications were issued on 12.03.2008 and 30.06.2008 under Section 4 and 6 of the Act, 1894; respectively and the compensation for the aforesaid land had been received by the petitioner. However, compensation for Abadi land in Gata no.730 (total area) and Gata no.663 (1/4th part) was, however, deposited back in the Government Treasury pursuant to the order dated 05.04.2014 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (land and revenue) on a dispute raised with regard to Abadi land.

On coming into operation of the Abadi Regularisation Regulation 2015, an application dated 15.11.2016 was moved by the petitioner and when no decision was taken, a writ petition was filed wherein directions were issued vide judgment and order dated 04.03.2020. The order impugned further records that on an inquiry made about the claim of the petitioner for regularisation of existing Abadi in two plots namely Gata no.730 and 663, it was found that at the time of submission of the acquisition proposal, a joint survey of the land, the subject matter of proposal was conducted, which was proved by the Additional District Magistrate (land and revenue/acquiring officer after spot inspection. In the said inspection, nothing attached to the earth was found over khasra no.663 and 730 (claimed as Abadi). It was further noted that in the acquired area, the provisions of Section 9 of the U.P Industrial Area Development Act are applicable. The petitioner herein had raised construction over the land in question at a later point of time without permission and sanctioned map.

It was further noted that the Abadi Regularisation Regulation 2015 are applicable to those rural Abadi which were existing on 05.11.2011, before promulgation of Abadi Regularisation Regulation 2011 amended by Regulations 2015. It was thus concluded that since no Abadi was existing at the time of acquisition and award of compensation in the year 2008, the petitioner is not entitled for regularisation of Abadi khasra nos.663 and 730 which are illegal constructions over the land belonging to the development authority.

It may be noted that though the petitioner herein disputes the averments in the order impugned about the existence of Abadi and stated that since the compensation was realised from him in the year 2014 under the order passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), the question of existence of Abadi does not arise. The dispute raised by the Chief Executive Officer in the order impugned about the existence of Abadi on the date of promulgation of regularisation of Regulation 2011 i.e 05.11.2011 thus is liable to be discarded.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, suffice it to note that beyond assertion for compensation having been deposited by the petitioner with regard to Gata no.630 pursuant to the order passed by the Additional District Magistrate dated 05.04.2014, nothing has been brought on record to demonstrate that the Abadi as claimed in Gata nos.663 and 730 was existing at the time of preparation of proposal for acquisition or before issuance of the acquisition notification in the year, 2008. The order dated 5.4.2014 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), pursuant to which compensation for two plots namely 730 and 663 was deposited in the treasury has also not been brought on record.

The findings returned by the Chief Executive Officer, NOIDA in the order impugned about the construction being illegal without permission or sanctioned map, therefore, cannot be interfered.

No infirmity could be found in the order impugned.

As regards the challenge to the award dated 10.07.2015 with respect to Gata No.663 area 0.3857 hectares, suffice it to note that the challenge to the award on the ground that no agreement was arrived with respect to Gata no.663 (area as mentioned above) with respect to compensation and as such the award under Section 11(2) of the Act, 1894 is illegal, has been raised for the first time in the present petition filed in the month of May, 2022. We may record that in the previous round of litigation, the writ petition before this Court, no such prayer was made. The award was declared in the year, 2015.

A perusal of the description in the table given in the award dated 10.07.2015 indicates that for the entire area of Khata no.274 (comprising of plots noted above) and khata no.641 comprising of Gata no.663, the award was declared on the basis of compromise in accordance with the Karar Niyamawali, 1997.

It is admitted to the petitioner that compensation for the entire land was received by him on 04.10.2008. The reason why it was deposited in the Government Treasury has not been brought before us. The dispute raised by the petitioner with regard to the correctness of the award being under Karar Niyamawali 1997 cannot be entertained having been raised for the first time in May, 2022. We find no justification to examine the correctness of the award on the ground that the averments therein about declaration of award under the Karar Niyamawali 1997 is incorrect.

In any case, once the dispute raised by the petitioner about the existence of Abadi in plot no.663 and regularisation thereof has been turned down by the competent authority and we find no justification to interfere in the order of rejection. The other reliefs prayed in the writ petition cannot be granted.

In view of the above discussion, the writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merits.

Order Date :- 29.8.2022/Harshita