Disposed

Nitisri Build Track Private Ltd. and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC30 May 2019WRIC/19239/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a direction to return vacant land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and to decide a pending exemption application. The court disposed of the matter by directing the respondent authority to decide the pending representation within three months.

What did the court decide?

The respondent no. 2 is directed to decide the petitioner's representation dated 28.03.2019 under Section 48 of the Act, 1894 within three months.

Nitisri Build Track Private Ltd. and Another Vs State of… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19239 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Nitisri Build Track Private Ltd. And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Singh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kartikeya Saran

¶4

Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs :-

¶6

"(a) issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing respondents to return the above noted vacant land to the petitioners which area is .1276 hectare on the spot taken from both the Arazi No. 1236 and 1247 situated in village Noor Nagar, District Ghaziabad.

¶7

(b) issue writ order or direction in the nature o mandamus directing respondent no. 2 to decide the representation of the petitioner filed on 28.03.2019 as Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition."

¶8

The petitioners were the owner of Khasra No. 1236 and 1247 situated in village Noor Nagar, Pargana Loni, District Ghaziabad. The land was acquired by the State-respondents after notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (herein after referred to as the 'Act, 1894' ) was published on 13.07.2012, thereafter declaration under Section 6(1)/17 was published on 14.08.2013. The said land was acquired for the Ghaziabad Development Authority.

¶9

According to the petitioners, 0.075 hectare land was acquired from Khasra No. 123 and 0.2550 hectare was acquired from Khasra No. 1247, both the Khasra numbers are adjacent to each other. A road has been constructed over Khasra No. 1236, area . 0443 hectare, while .1281 hectare has been taken from Khasra No. 1247. Thus, the total area over which the road was constructed is .3300 hectare.

¶10

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the remaining area of land is still lying vacant and under the exclusive possession of the petitioners. It is further submitted that though the Award has been declared by the Collector but no compensation has been paid to the petitioners till date.

¶11

Petitioners had moved an application under Section 48 of the Act, 1894 for exempting their land from acquisition proceedings on 28.03.2019 which is pending consideration.

¶12

We have heard Shri Kamal Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Kartikey Saran, learned counsel for respondent no. 2, learned Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1, 3 & $ and perused the records of the present petition.

¶13

With the consent of the parties the matter is taken on the Board and is being decided at the admission stage without calling for any further affidavits.

¶14

We, therefore, dispose of the present petition directing the respondent no. 2 (Chief Executive Officer/Vice Chairman, Ghaziabad Development Authority, District Ghaziabad) to decide the representation of the petitioners dated 28.03.2019 in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶15

Order Date :- 30.5.2019 VR

Nitisri Build Track Private Ltd. and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitisri Build Track Private Ltd. and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sumit Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sandeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ratan Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vivek Sharma Vs Sheetal Sharma

Manoj Srivastava Vs Sangita Alias Santosh Srivastava

Neelkanth Mining Vs State of U P and 3 Others