Court No. - 39
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12550 of 2019 Petitioner :- Shanti Devi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kripa Shankar Shukla,Krishna Nand Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ravi Prakash Pandey
Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard Shri Kripa Shankar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Shri Ravi Prakash Pandey, for the respondent no. 3 and learned standing counsel for the State - respondent nos. 1 & 2.
On 11.04.2019, this Court had passed the following order:-
"The grievance of the petitioner is that his plot No.340 was declared surplus under the provisions of Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976. The said proceeding was challenged by the petitioner by way of filing writ petition. The said writ petition was allowed whereby the notice under Section 8 of the Act was set aside. The finding recorded that petitioner was in possession, hence the proceeding stands lapsed, the copy of the judgment is on record.
It appears that before the judgment of this Court, the land was acquired under the provision of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but further proceedings were not undertaken on the ground that the land in question was declared surplus.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the land already vested in the State Government under the provision of the Act, but no possession has been taken. He has drawn our attention to the letter of Secretary, Varanasi Development Authority, Varanasi that no further proceeding has been taken, pursuant to the land acquisition as the matter was pending under the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that Varanasi Development Authority after taking possession has raised construction over the said plot without giving any compensation to the petitioner.
Sri R.P. Pandey, learned Counsel for respondent no.3, may seek instructions in the matter, especially on the fact that whether on plot no.340, Varanasi Development Authority has raised any construction after taking possession or not.
Put up this case on 26.4.2019, as a fresh. "
Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submits that the petitioners would be satisfied if a direction is given to the respondent no. 3 to decide their representation, so that correct facts may come on record as, till date, no counter affidavit has been filed.
We, therefore, dispose of this writ petition with a direction that if the petitioners prefer a fresh representation before the Secretary, Varanasi Development Authority, Varanasi (respondent no. 3), in respect of relief no. (ii) claimed in this writ petition with regard to their claim for compensation, within 15 days from today, the respondent no. 3 shall consider and decide the petitioners' representation, in accordance with law, within a further period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order in his Office.
It is made clear that the Court has not adjudicated the claim of the petitioner on merits.
Order Date :- 29.5.2019 Amit Mishra