Hon'ble A.P. Sahi, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition arising out of proceedings for mutation in relation to the land in question which is subject matter of a lease executed by the Collector, Allahabad. The lease registered on 29.6.1940, has been brought on record through the counter-affidavit sworn by Sri D.S. Pandey, Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Sadar), Allahabad. The orders under challenge in the present writ petition have been passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate on 25.8.2008 as affirmed by the Board of Revenue on 21.1.2010 as well as the orders passed by the Naib Tehsildar (Government Estate) dated 29.2.2008 and 30.4.2008. The petitioner claims itself to be the assignee of the original lessee. The transfer by way of assignment in favour of the petitioner came through a deed dated 10.7.1990.
(2.) AFTER the lease was assigned, the petitioner tendered an application before the Allahabad Development Authority, which is the authority empowered to sanction maps for raising constructions and making a planned development. The authority, pending consideration, called upon the petitioner to obtain a No Objection Certificate from the Collector, Allahabad. The same was not being done as a result whereof a direction was issued by this Court to the Collector to pass appropriate orders. The Collector refused to grant the No Objection Certificate on 25.4.1995. The petitioner questioned the correctness of the said order by means of Writ Petition No. 13203 of 1995, which was initially dismissed but on a review petition filed by the petitioner, the same was ultimately allowed by a Division Bench vide judgment dated 13.4.2000, which is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. It was held that the order of the District Magistrate dated 25.4.1995 was founded on an erroneous consideration and, therefore, was being quashed with a direction to consider the question of grant of No Objection Certificate with reference to the plan submitted by the petitioner within a period of one month. The Collector again refused to grant the No Objection Certificate vide order dated 22.8.2000 which was assailed by the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 42687 of 2000. During the pendency of the said writ petition, the Collector also proceeded to pass orders on 4.9.2003 nullifying the lease in favour of the original lessee and the assignment in favour of the petitioner. This was assailed in Writ Petition No. 5144 of 2003 where an interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner. While the aforesaid two writ petitions were pending before this Court, the petitioner had also approached the State Government in this matter. The State Government, after seeking legal opinion, on 5.12.2005 passed an order holding that the orders dated 22.8.2000 and 4.9.2003, which were subject matter of the two writ petitions before this Court, were not correct and, accordingly, set aside the same with a direction to the Collector, Allahabad, to pass a fresh order in relation to the restoration of the lease as well as the No Objection Certificate. This order dated 5.12.2005 was not questioned either by the authorities or by any other person.
(3.) THE two writ petitions referred to hereinabove were disposed of by a final judgment dated 6.9.2006 by the following directions contained in the order quoted herein below: "In view of the subsequent development, it is not necessary to decide these two writ petitions on merit. During pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner filed an application before the State Government in the month of December, 2004 against the orders dated 22.8.2000 and 4.9.2003 passed by the Collector, Allahabad. THE State Government after taking legal opinion have passed an order on 5.12.2003 by which it is held that the ground mentioned by the Collector in the orders dated 22.8.2000 and 4.9.2003 are not acceptable and the matter was sent back for re-decision. This order has been filed alongwith the supplementary-affidavit. We had granted time to the respondents but no counter-affidavit has been filed. In view of this, both the writ petitions are disposed of with the direction that the Collector may pass orders in accordance with law at an early date, if possible, within three months from the date of receipt of production of certified copy of this order. With these observations, both the writ petitions are disposed of." The Collector did not proceed in the matter and, therefore, the petitioner filed a contempt petition before this Court. The Collector in turn sought clarifications from the State Government and the State Government reiterated its earlier opinion. After issuance of notice, the Collector passed orders on 24.10.2007. By this order, the Collector restored the lease in favour of the petitioner on certain conditions entailed in paragraph No. 38 of the same and further issued a direction to the subordinate authorities to carry out the mutation accordingly, calling upon the petitioner to deposit the land revenue as per rules.;