M.KATJU , UMESHWAR PANDEY, JJ. - (1.) HEARD counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE petitioner has prayed for a mandamus directing respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner for acquisition of the disputed land under the Land Acquisition Act with interest and solatium. It is alleged in para 2 of the writ petition, that the petitioner is the owner of plot Nos. 7, 8 and 55 in village Harthana, District Moradabad. This land was among the land which was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act. The Notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 13.9.1991 and Notification under Section 6 on 10.9.1992. Possession of the plot was taken by respondent No. 3, Moradabad Development Authority on 28.10.1994, which is also admitted in para 4 of the counter -affidavit filed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Moradabad on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4. Copy of the possession certificate is Annexure -1 to the writ petition. True copy of the award dated 6.8.1997 is Annexure -2 to the writ petition. In this award the petitioner's aforesaid land is not included arid no award has been made in respect of the disputed plots.
(3.) IT is not disputed that the land was exempted from the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act by order dated 11.5.1987 (Annexure -3 to the writ petition). It appears that the land was declared surplus by the competent authority under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act on 19.6.1992 but in our opinion this order was wholly void because the land was already exempted earlier under Section 20 of the Act. In fact as letter dated 1.12.1999 (Annexure -6 to the petition) was issued by the Secretary U.P. Government to the Collector, Moradabad, to make payment to the petitioner in accordance with Land Acquisition Act, but as yet no compensation has been made to the petitioner.;