This court dismissed a writ petition seeking mandamus to re-determine land compensation. The court held that jurisdiction under Article 227 does not permit altering contract conditions. A plea of fraud requires a civil suit.
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. - 39
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35844 of 2022
Petitioner :- Vidyawati Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nikhil Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dhananjay Awasthi
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.
Sri Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel for the respondent- Development Authority is present.
The present petition has been filed with the following prayers:-
"(i) To issue a suitable writ or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to re-determine just, fair and proper compensation in respect of the property for which a sale deed has been executed between the petitioner and the respondent authority, for which no consideration was fixed at the time of mutual consent given by the petitioner.
(ii) To issue a suitable writ or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to re-determine the rate of consideration by applying the rate of Rs.77 lacs as per hectare as per published circle rate notified in 2016 and certified copy as obtained on 23.05.2019 as applicable in the case of the petitioner's individual land holding, and then to calculate the consideration thereof, as per "The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act' 2013".
(iii) To issue a suitable writ or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to re-determine the consideration in respect of the property of the petitioner in respect of the property of the petitioner in terms of the provisions of Sections 26, 27 & 28 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act' 2013."
The petitioner herein has executed the sale-deed on 08.07.2021 in favour of the Gorakhpur Industrial Development Authority (GIDA) for the sale of land-in-question for the purpose of project namely 'GIDA Industrial Corridor'.
It is sought to be submitted in the writ petition that the letter of consent signed by the petitioner prescribed the valuation of the plot as four times of the prevailing circle rate in respect of the land-in-question for determination of sale consideration as compensation, for the acquisition of land by consent for the project in question.
Submission is that the sale consideration determined under the sale-deed dated 08.07.2021 is not as per the condition provided in the letter of consent, in accordance with the circle rate of the land-in-question fixed by the Collector concerned which was accepted by the petitioner. The submission, thus, is that the saledeed dated 08.07.2021 is a result of fraud and misrepresentation on the part of the respondent- Authority. The petitioner being innocent agriculturalist has been duped by the respondentsauthorities. The sale consideration under the sale-deed dated 08.07.2021 has not been determined.
Testing the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the considered view that the validity of the sale-deed dated 08.07.2021 cannot be examined within the scope of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as issuance of any direction prayed herein would result in altering the conditions of contract finalised between the parties.
On any plea of fraud, coercion, undue influence or misrepresentation on the part of the respondents, it is open for the petitioner to file civil suit seeking appropriate relief with regard to the determination of sale consideration.
The writ petition is dismissed, accordingly.
Order Date :- 2.2.2023 P Kesari
Digitally signed by :- PRACHI KESARWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Article 227 jurisdiction allows the High Court to alter final contract conditions regarding land sale consideration.
Whether the petitioner's plea of fraud is maintainable through a writ petition or a civil suit.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Vidyawati Devi
State Of U.P.
Gorakhpur Industrial Development Authority
Development Authority
State Of U.P.
Sunita Agarwal
Vipin Chandra Dixit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
