Allahabad High Court
Smt. Ram Kanya vs State Of U P And 2 Others on 7 April, 2023
Bench: Surya Prakash Kesarwani, Anish Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 3
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35131 of 2022
Petitioner :- Smt. Ram Kanya
Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Kumar Mishra,Shiv Sevak Ram
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajiv Gupta, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
Undisputedly the petitioner is the sankramaniya bhumidhar of Khasra plot no. 271 measuring 1.1190 hectare situated in Village-Terahara, Pargana Kada, Tehsil-Sirathu, District Kaushambi. Adjoining the aforesaid Khasra plot is the Khasra plot no. 270, which is a chak marg. While constructing a kachcha pathway over the chak marg land, a little land of the petitioner was also encroached. About 10-15 years ago, the aforesaid kachcha pathway was converted into a brick road. According to the petitioner, the respondents while constructing a metaled road in the year 2022 encroached the land of the aforesaid Khasra plot no. 271, measuring 24 ft in width and 680 ft in length and thus encroached total 16320 sq. ft. As per impugned order dated 01.09.2022, the aforesaid land of the petitioner affected by construction of road is about 1120 sq. mt. Thus, it is admitted to the respondents that additional land of the aforesaid bhumidhari plot no. 271 of the petitioner has been encroached by the respondents for constructing a metaled road.
Such encroachment is prima facie without authority of law and without payment of any compensation to the petitioner. When the road was attempted to be constructed by the respondents, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 19.4.2022 before the respondent no.2 i.e. the District Magistrate, Kaushambi and when nothing was done by him then the petitioner, who is an old lady aged about 80 years; approached this Court by filing Writ C No. 14023 of 2022 which was disposed of by a detailed judgment and order dated 23.05.2022.
The petitioner submitted a certified copy of the aforesaid judgement along with a representation dated 2.6.2022 before the District Magistrate, Kaushambi who passed the impugned order dated 1.9.2022 rejecting the representation of the petitioner on the ground that a kachcha pathway was constructed about 40 years ago in public interest probably with the consent of the petitioner which was subsequently made a brick road and now it has been made a metaled road and therefore, no compensation is required to be paid.
We have carefully considered the submissions of learned counsels for the parties and with their consent this writ petition is being finally decided without calling for a counter affidavit.
We have carefully perused the impugned order dated 1.9.2022 passed by the District Magistrate, Kaushambi and we find that the District Magistrate, Kaushambi has not only completely ignored the representation of the petitioner but also the judgment and order of this Court dated 23.5.2022 in Writ C No. 14023 of 2022 (Smt. Ram Kanya vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others). Grievance of the petitioner is with respect to widening of the road resulting in additional encroachment over her bhumidhari land but the respondents have completely ignored this aspect of the matter and passed the impugned order despite report of the Sub Divisional Officer, Sirathu that the land of Khasra plot no. 271 is a bhumidhari land of the petitioner and the PWD, Kaushambi has constructed a road over the petitioner's land.
For all the reasons aforestated, we quash the impugned order dated 1.9.2022 passed by the District Magistrate, Kaushambi with cost of Rs. 5000/- which he shall pay to the petitioner within two weeks. A direction is issued to the respondent no.2 to consider the case of the petitioner and pass a speaking and reasoned order within four weeks from the date of submission of certified copy of this order in accordance with law, and determine the amount of compensation, if any, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the respondent no.3. The amount of compensation so determined, if any, shall be paid by the respondents to the petitioner within next four weeks.
With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 7.4.2023
Kirti
