Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,J.
This writ petition was presented before this Court on 20th November, 2008 with the allegation that the respondents are constructing a road over the plot of the petitioner without providing for compensation and without acquiring the same. For the purpose reliance was placed upon the report of the Lekhpal dated 21.03.2008, copy whereof has been enclosed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition. The petitioner, therefore, prayed for a mandamus commanding the respondents to stop the construction of the road as well as for a mandamus commanding the respondents to vacate the land of the petitioner and to restore it back to the petitioner. Lastly it was prayed that the respondents be directed to pay compensation for the damages caused to the standing wheat crops and solatium as required by Section 23(1-A) and 23(2) with interest thereon. In the opinion of the Court the relief as prayed for cannot be entertained in writ jurisdiction. It is still to be decided by any competent authority as to whether any portion of the land of the petitioner has been encroached upon for the purpose o construction of the road or not. Mere report of the Lekpal will not suffice. Further it has to be determined as to what exact area of the petitioner's land has been encroached upon (if any such encroachment has taken place) and as to whether the crops, as claimed by the petitioner, have actually been damaged or not. The Court finds that the petitioner herself has made a representation raising her grievances before the District Magistrate, copy whereof has been enclosed as Annexure-6 to the writ petition. In this background as well as in view of the stand taken by the Standing Counsel that, instead of District Magistrate, the grievance of the petitioner can be more appropriately examined by the Chief Development Officer, Allahabad, a direction was issued permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation ventilating all her grievances before the Chief Development Officer, Allahabad, who in turn was required to decide the same within the time prescribed.
It appears that the petitioner has not filed the representation as permitted under the order. He has made an application for recall of the order. We find that no good ground to recall the order dated 24.11.2008. Petitioner may either approach the Chief Development Officer, Allahabad as permitted under the earlier order of the Court within two weeks from today or else she may file a suit, wherein the issue, as to whether any land of the petitioner has been encroached upon or whether any compensation is payable to the petitioner or not, can be adjudicated after examining the evidence. Application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 22.1.2010 Pkb/