Court No. - 3
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16294 of 2017 Petitioner :- Smt. Prakasho Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shivam Yadav
Hon'ble Krishna Murari,J. Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Kakkar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The claim of the petitioner in the writ petition is for grant of admissible difference of compensation treating the land of the petitioner in the category of Pushtaini land. Admittedly, she was granted compensation as gair-pushtaini, whereas the petitioner is claiming that her land falls within the category of Pushtaini land.
The issue being purely factual in nature, no useful purpose would be served by keeping this petition pending and calling for a counter affidavit and the interest of justice would stand served by directing the fact finding authority to consider the claim of the petitioner at the initial stage.
Shri Shivam Yadav, who has accepted notices on behalf of respondent no. 2, states that the representation made by the petitioner in this regard before respondent-authority is being processed.
The same becomes clear from a perusal of Annexure 6 to the writ petition, which is some opinion sought from the D.G.C. in respect of the claim of the petitioner.
Considering the facts and circumstances, we dispose of the writ petition by directing respondent no. 4 to decide the claim of the petitioner for being paid compensation treating her land to be Pushtaini in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 18.4.2017 VKS