RAVI NATH TILHARI,JJ. - (1.) Heard Sri B.C. Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Additional Advocate General, U.P. assisted by Sri Mohanji Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Mrs. S. Rathi, learned counsel for respondent no. 4.
(2.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer to :- i. issue a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 06.08.2018 as contained in Annexure No. 17 passed by the Principal Secretary, Avas Evam Sahari Niyojan Anubhag-6, Lucknow/ Respondent No. 1 and E-tender notice dated 11.10.2018 as contained in Annexure No. 19 issued by the Moradabad Development Authority, Moradabad/Respondent no. 4 inviting bid for development of a residential colony over Gata No. 02 (2A and 2B) situated at village- Shahpur Tigri, Tehsil and District- Moradabad; ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Moradabad to restore the entry of the name of the petitioner in revenue records in respect to Gata Nos. 2A (area 40523.93 sq. metres) and 2B (area 2063.97 sq. metres), total area 42587.96 square metres situated in revenue village- Shahpur, Tigri, Tehsil- Moradabad, District- Moradabad; iii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to interfere in the actual physical possession of the petitioner over the Gata Nos. 2A and 2B situated in revenue village- Shahpur, Tigri, Tehsil- Moradabad, District- Moradabad; iv. issue such other and further writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case; and v. award the cost of the writ petition.
(3.) Briefly stated the facts of this case are that the petitioner's plot namely Gata Nos. 2A (area 40523.93 sq. metres) and 2B (area 2063.97 sq. metres), total area 42587.96 square metres situated in revenue village- Shahpur, Tigri, Tehsil- Moradabad, District- Moradabad (hereinafter referred to as the 'land in question') was declared surplus under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act , 1976, hereinafter referred to as the 'principal Act'. He challenged the proceeding by means of Writ Petition No. 19264 of 1993 wherein this Court on 7.6.1993 passed an interim order that the petitioner will not be dispossessed from the land in question. Vide order dated 14.10.1993, the said interim order was continued. In the meantime, the principal Act was repealed. In view of the said fact, a Division Bench of this Court vide its judgement dated 21.9.2001 abated the proceedings under the principal Act and in view of the said fact, the writ petition was disposed of. It appears that inspite of the said judgement, no consequential steps were taken by the respondents on the representation of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner preferred a Writ Petition No. 4085 of 2006 in which this Court found that a short question was required to be decided whether actual physical possession was or was not taken in the proceedings under the principal Act. Pursuant to the order of Division Bench dated 23.1.2006, a decision was taken by respondent no. 1 on 9.5.2007 wherein the authorities found that the petitioner is not in physical possession.;