Petitioner challenged District Magistrate's refusal to review circle rate for land acquisition compensation. Court found no fit case for interference regarding market value demand.
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.
Court No. - 4
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6460 of 2020
Petitioner :- Vijay Laxmi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Fatma Khatoon Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4 and Sri S.C. Dwivedi, learned counsel for Respondent No.2.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following prayers:
" (i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of a suitable certiorari quash the order dated 21.8.2019 passed by District Magistrate Auraiya, Disrict Auraiya, review the circle rate of the land of the petitioner as per circle rate of the land along side of Abadi area of Revenue village Miholi and not compel her to sale them the land properly otherwise she and her family would be compelled to die without starvation diet as the coins cannot be substitute of the grains, so that justice may be done.
(ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus direct the respondents to decide the representation dated 11.9.2019 sent to the Respondent No.1, and pay the complete fertile land acquisition compensation amount, otherwise the petitioner/applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.
(iii) issue any other, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.
(iv) award cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner."
It appears that the petitioner demanded sale consideration at market value prevalent in the village Miholi, while her land is situated in village Bakhariya. The District Magistrate passed an order on 21st August, 2019 stating therein that it was not possible to pay sale consideration at the rate demanded by the petitioner.
In view of the above, we do not find it a fit case for interference. However, the petitioner may approach the authorities for redressal of her grievance.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 24.2.2020 Shalini
1 issue framed by the court
Whether this is a fit case for interference in the writ petition regarding land acquisition compensation review?
Vijay Laxmi
State Of U.P.
Other Respondents
Bala Krishna Narayana
Prakash Padia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
