Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/745/2017 on 3 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
ON THE 3RD MARCH DAY OF, 2022
BEFORE:
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ K. TIWARI
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 745 of 2017
BETWEEN:
Mrs. Satyawati ... Petitioner
(By Ms. Neetu Singh, Advocate)
AND:
State of Uttarakhand & others ... Respondents
(Mr. G.S. Negi, learned Additional C.S.C. and Mr.
Bhupendra Prasad, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Nagesh
Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent nos. 4 & 5)
JUDGMENT
1. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has
sought the following relief:-
(a) Issue an appropriate order, Writ or directions
in the nature of Certiorari commanding the
Respondents to quash the Impugned
Recovery Certificate dated 23.8.2016
(annexed as Annexure-8 with this Writ
Petition), in the interest of justice to the
Petitioner.
(b) Issue appropriate order, Writ or directions in
the nature of Mandamus commanding the
Respondent No. 3 to decide the
representations dated 08.08.2016 &
27.8.2016 (annexed as Annexure-5 colly with
this Writ Petition) by an speaking order, in
the interest of justice to the Petitioner.
(c) Issue appropriate order, Writ or directions in
the nature of Mandamus commanding the
Respondent No.-3 to withdraw the recovery
letter dated 04.08.2016 (annexed as
Annexure-7 with this Writ Petition), in the
interest of justice to the Petitioner.
2. Petitioner is the widow of Late Yashvir Singh.
Yashvir Singh had ancestral property in Manglour,
District Haridwar in which he was a co-owner. Part of
the said property was acquired for widening of Highway
and petitioner received certain amount, as
compensation. Subsequently, when other co-owners
staked claim for compensation in respect of their share
in the acquired property, then an inquiry was made by
Special Land Acquisition Officer and it was found that
other co-owners were also entitled to part of the
amount paid as compensation to petitioner, as their
share in the property was also acquired and petitioner
wrongly received compensation even in respect of share
of other co-owners in the acquired property. The
excess amount, paid as compensation to the petitioner,
was sought to be recovered from petitioner by issuing a
recovery certificate. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner
has approached this Court.
3. Ms. Neetu Singh, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner submitted that petitioner was entitled
to the entire amount, which was paid as compensation
to her, as she was the sole owner of the acquired
property. In support of this contention, she referred to
certain documents i.e. family settlement, power of
attorney, sale deed etc. and submitted that she had
acquired title over the entire acquired property through
those documents.
4. The contention raised on behalf of the
petitioner, however, is disputed by learned counsels for
the respondents, who submitted that petitioner was
owner of part of the property, therefore, she was not
entitled to entire amount of compensation.
5. Respondent nos. 4 & 5 have filed their
separate counter affidavits in which they have asserted
that petitioner wrongly received the entire amount of
compensation and they are also entitled to
compensation for their share in the acquired property.
6. Thus, the question which falls for
consideration in this writ petition is whether petitioner
is the sole owner of the acquired property or whether
share of respondent nos. 4 & 5 was also there in the
acquired property, for which they are also entitled for
compensation. Thus, the controversy involved in this
writ petition boils down to a title dispute.
7. Petitioner has referred to various transactions
in support of her contention that she became sole
owner of the acquired property. Whether she acquired
title, based on those transactions and to what extent, is
a disputed question of fact, which cannot be
adjudicated by this Court, while exercising power under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
8. In such view of the matter, this Court
declines to interfere in the matter. As such, the writ
petition is dismissed with liberty to petitioner to
approach the appropriate forum available to her, in law.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
Aswal
