- (1.) Heard Sri Pankaj Dubey, learned Counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners have come up for the following reliefs: (i) to issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to return back the land comprising of Khasra No. 429 Area 0.4215 Hect. of revenue Village Patwari, Pargana Dadri, Dehsil Dadri, District - Gautam Budh Nagar, to the petitioners. (ii) to issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to take any action and not to make any construction upon the land of the petitioners comprising of Khasra No. 429, Area 0.4215 Hect. of revenue Village Patwari, Pargana Dadri, Tehsil Dadri, District - Gautam Budh Nagar. (iii) to issue any other order or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (iv) to award the costs of the petition to this petitioners. At the very outset, Sri Pankaj Dubey, learned Counsel for the petitioners, states that the petitioners have not filed any writ petition challenging the acquisition proceedings at any stage.
(2.) The petitioners claim benefit of getting back the land on the ground that since in the case of Harkaran Singh v. State of U.P. and others, 2011 6 ADJ 755, the entire Notification has been quashed, therefore, the land deserves to be returned to the petitioners.
(3.) We are unable to agree with this proposition for the simple reason that this issue about the impact of the said decision which was under reference was squarely dealt with by the Full Bench decision in the case of Gajraj and others v. State of U.P. and others, 2011 11 ADJ 1, alongwith the issue relating to those farmers who had filed writ petitions that were dismissed and where those who had not filed their writ petitions where the Court in Paragraph Nos. 480 and 481 recorded findings which are extracted herein below: 480. There is one more aspect of the matter which needs to be considered. The Apex Court in Om Prakash v. Union of India, 2010 4 SCC 17 has held that when a declaration is quashed by any Court, it will only for the benefit of those who have approached the Court. Following was laid down in paragraph 74: The facts of the aforesaid cases would show that in the case in hand as many as four declarations under Section 6 of the Act were issued from time to time. Finally when declaration is quashed by any Court, it would only enure to the benefit of those who had approached the Court. It would certainly not extend the benefit to those who had not approached the Court or who might have gone into slumber. 481. As noticed above, the land has been acquired of large number of villagers in different villages of Greater Noida and Noida. Some of the petitioners had earlier come to this Court and their writ petitions have been dismissed as noticed above upholding the notifications which judgments have become final between them. Some of the petitioners may not have come to the Court and have left themselves in the hand of the Authority and State under belief that the State and Authority shall do the best for them as per law. We cannot loose sight of the fact that the above farmers and agricultures/owners whose land has been acquired are equally affected by taking of their land. As far as consequence and effect of the acquisition it equally affects on all land losers. Thus land owners whose writ petitions have earlier been dismissed upholding the notifications may have grievances that the additional compensation which was a subsequent event granted by the Authority may also be extended to them and for the aforesaid, further spate of litigation may start in so far as payment of additional compensation is concerned. In the circumstances, we leave it to the Authority to take a decision as to whether the benefit of additional compensation shall also be extended to those with regard to whom the notifications of acquisition have been upheld or those who have not filed any writ petitions. We leave this in the discretion of the Authority/State which may be exercised keeping in view the principles enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.;