Disposed

Power Grid Meerut Simbhavali Transmission Ltd. v. State of U.P. and 12 Others

Allahabad HC17 Aug 2021WRIC/7555/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench disposed of a writ petition seeking transfer of disputed land for a power project. The Court directed the District Magistrate to summon rival claimants, deposit sale consideration in an escrow account pending the title suit's outcome, and consider standing crop compensation arrangement.

What did the court decide?

Directing District Magistrate to summon rival claimants, enlist them as co-vendors, deposit sale consideration in escrow account pending title suit outcome, and manage standing crop compensation.

Power Grid Meerut Simbhavali Transmission Ltd. Vs State… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 40

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7555 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Power Grid Meerut Simbhavali Transmission Ltd. Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 12 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ganesh Shanker Srivastava,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv) Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Santosh Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Ganesh Shanker Srivastava for the petitioner; the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 6; Shri Santosh Kumar Srivastava for the respondent nos. 7, 8 and 9; Shri Shailesh Updhyay and Shri Anupam Kulshreshtha for the respondent nos. 10 to 12 and the heirs of the respondent no. 13.

¶6

The prayer in this petition is to command the District Magistrate, Meerut/ President District Land Purchase Rate & Total Land Value Approval Committee, Meerut to ensure the transfer of land of plot no. 245 area 1.0790 Hectare situated at Village Ahmadpuri @ Amenpuri, Pargana Kithore, Tehsil Mawana, District Meerut in favour of the petitioner.

¶7

The reason for filing of such a petition is that the petitioner in connection with a project requires land. The recorded tenure holders of the land are agreeable to transfer the land in favour of the petitioner but there is a litigation pending in connection with the land between the recorded tenure holder and others, therefore, in absence of all the litigating parties joining to execute the sale deed, the sale deed may become invalid. Hence, a direction has been sought upon the District Magistrate, Meerut to ensure transfer of the land.

¶8

After noticing the aforesaid situation and that the litigation relating to the title of the plot concerned was pending in this Court as Writ-B No. 23610 of 2000, on 5.7.2021 following order was passed:

¶9

"This petition has been filed by Power Grid Meerut Simbhavali Transmission Ltd in which prayer has been made to direct the respondent no.3 (District Magistrate, Meerut) to ensure transfer of land of Plot No. 245 in favour of the petitioner to enable it to complete the power project which, according to the petitioner, is of national importance and of extreme urgency.

¶10

The difficulty in acquisition of plot no. 245 is that plot no. 245 is recorded in the name of Amit Kumar, Ankit Kumar and Sunita but an adverse claim

¶11

in respect thereto has been set up by Dhanpal, Surendrapal, Rakesh and Shanker, which is engaging the attention of this Court in Writ Petition No. 23610 of 2000, which is cognizable by a Single Judge Bench. On account of pendency of this claim, the State is not willing to get the sale-deed executed from the recorded tenure-holder as there may be future complications in respect of the validity of such sale-deed.

¶12

Keeping in mind the urgency in the matter, this Court, vide order dated 18.03.2021, directed that this writ petition be listed along with record of Writ Petition No 23610 of 2000 so that both the petitions could be decided simultaneously.

¶13

As the connected writ petition No. 23610 of 2000 is cognizable by a Single Judge Bench, we deem it appropriate to direct the office to place both the petitions before Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice/Senior Judge, High Court, Allahabad for nomination so that both the matters could be heard by a Division Bench to finally settle the dispute between the parties.

¶14

Let the matter be listed again before appropriate Bench on 12th July 2021 after obtaining nomination from Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice/Senior Judge, High Court, Allahabad.

¶15

This order has been passed in the presence of Sri R.K. Ojha, who appears for the petitioner; Sri Santosh Kumar Srivastava, who appears for the respondents in connected Writ Petition No. 23610 of 2000; and Sri Rajneesh Kumar Rai holding brief of Sri Shailesh Upadhyay, who appears for the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 23610 of 2000.

¶16

It is understood between the counsel for the parties that on the next date, both the petitions shall be heard finally."

¶17

Pursuant to the above order, the pending Writ-B No. 23610 of 2000 which is otherwise cognizable by Single Judge Bench has also been nominated to this Bench.

¶18

At this stage, the learned counsel for the parties, namely, the private respondents in the petition and the contesting parties in Writ-B No. 23610 of 2000, submit that there are various complex issues in the title matter pending adjudication as WritB No. 23610 of 2000 and that may take time. Moreover, substitution of the heirs of some of the deceased party may also be required therefore, it has been suggested that all the rival claimants of the land may be allowed to join in execution of the sale deed to be executed in favour of the petitioner because, ultimately, all the claimants are interested in the compensation paid in lieu of the land. However, they pray that the compensation may be deposited in an escrow account, maintained in a nationalized bank, by way of term deposit and be distributed as per the determination of rights in Writ-B No. 23610 of 2000.

¶19

In view of the above, keeping in mind that the aforesaid suggestion is a reasonable method of ensuring quick transfer of

¶20

land for a public project, we deem it appropriate to dispose off this petition by directing as follows:

¶21

The petitioner shall give a list of the claimants of the land from whom it proposes to purchase the land in the office of the District Collector (the third respondent) within three weeks from today. The District Magistrate shall, thereafter, summon those persons with their documents to his office and, after examining their documents, shall enlist them as a prospective co-vendor to the sale deed. After such a list of prospective covendors is prepared by the District Magistrate concerned, all the prospective co-vendors shall be given a date to appear in the office of the Sub-Registrar for execution and registration of the sale deed in favour of the petitioner.

¶22

The consideration for the sale shall be decided on the basis of mutual agreement between the parties and once it is fixed, the same shall be deposited with the third respondent (District Magistrate, Meerut), who shall keep the same in an escrow account opened in a nationalized bank by investing the money in a term deposit earning maximum rate of interest which would abide the result of the decision in Writ-B No. 23610 of 2000.

¶23

As and when Writ-B No. 23610 of 2000 is decided, the amount so deposited shall be disbursed amongst the claimants in the manner in which the decision so warrants. It is clarified that it would open to the parties to enter into a compromise in Writ-B No. 23610 of 2000 and to apply to the Court for disposal off that petition on the basis of compromise.

¶24

At this stage, Shri Anupam Kulshreshtha, who appears for one of the claimants, submits that there may be some observation in respect of compensation for the standing crop. In this regard, it is observed that if parties agree that compensation for the standing crop be paid to any one or more of the co-vendors then the compensation for the standing crop may be paid accordingly. But if the parties are not agreeable to the payment of compensation for the standing crop to any one of the covendors then compensation for the standing crop shall also be treated as part of the sale consideration for the land and shall be deposited and dealt with in the manner as directed above.

¶25

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this petition is disposed off .

¶26

In view of the disposal of this writ petition, the nominated WritB No. 23610 of 2000 need not be decided by us. Nomination, if any of Writ-B No. 23610 of 2000 therefore, stands discharged. Let Writ-B No. 23610 of 2000 be listed before appropriate

¶27

Single Judge Bench at an early date.

¶28

A copy of this order shall also be placed on the record of Writ-B No. 23610 of 2000.

¶29

Order Date :- 17.8.2021 A. V. Singh

Power Grid Meerut Simbhavali Transmission Ltd. v. State of U.P. and 12 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Power Grid Meerut Simbhavali Transmission Ltd. v. State of U.P. and 12 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeev Saxena Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anil Pratap Narain Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Babita Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

No.- 14918058M Lnk Paras Singh Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 9 Others

Smt. Ramawati Devi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Himadra Bhattacharya Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others