Writer's petition challenging demolition orders issued by NOIDA for constructions raised by petitioners who purchased plots after land acquisition. Court found no title and ordered dismissal.
Demolition notice dated 13 November 2017 upheld; writ petition dismissed as devoid of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Chief Justice's Court
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1753 of 2018
Petitioner :- Ram Baran Yadav And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- V.K. Agnihotri Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kaushalendra Nath Singh
Hon'ble Dilip B. Bhosale,Chief Justice Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard Sri V.K. Agnihotri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.K. Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent.
Petitioners, six in number, are assailing the demolition notice/order dated 18 September 2017 and 13 November 2017 passed by the NOIDA Development Authority (NOIDA).
We have gone through the impugned notice with the assistance of learned counsel for the parties.
It transpires that the land in dispute was acquired by the State under the Land Acquisition Act, NOIDA, thereof, is in possession. The petitioners purchased residential plots in the acquired area on 1 February 2011 i.e. after the acquisition proceedings and raised constructions thereon, consequently, petitioners were called upon to show cause, however, they did not appear before the Authority nor filed any representation. Consequently, demolition order came to be passed.
On specific query, learned counsel for the petitioners would admit that the petitioners purchased the property from the erstwhile owner after the acquisition proceedings
concluded, therefore, would contend that the petitioners do not have any right and title to the property, but would submit that since petitioners have got their residential house constructed, hence, are entitled to continue with their possession.
In rebuttal, learned Standing Counsel would submit that notification under section 4/17 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 11 September 2006, followed by notification under section 6/17 on 27 October 2006, thereafter, award was rendered on 30 December 2013. The NOIDA authority is in possession of the acquired land since 2006, it is thereafter that the petitioners purchased the property and raised constructions thereon, it is, therefore, urged that petitioners have no title or right over the property.
This fact is not being disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner.
In the circumstances, we do not find any illegality, infirmity or jurisdictional error in the impugned notice/order dated 13 November 2017.
The writ petition being devoid of merit, is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 12.1.2018 K.K. Maurya
(Suneet Kumar, J) (Dilip B. Bhosale,CJ)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the demolition notice is maintainable against petitioners who purchased property after acquisition and raised constructions on it.
Whether petitioners have a right to continue possession having no legal title to the property.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Ram Baran Yadav And 5 Others
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Dilip B. Bhosale
Suneet Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
