- (1.) Learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 Sri Ramendra Pratap Singh has produced before us an order dated 19.2.2014 passed in Writ Petition No. 10773 of 2014, which is based on identical facts. The said order is extracted below: "Heard Shri Pankaj Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ramendra Pratap Singh for the respondent no. 4. By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: "i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI, calling the records and quashing the impugned notification certiorari calling for the record and quashing the impugned notification no.6803/77-4-06-301N.-06 dated 31.08.2007 under section 4 of Land Acquisition Act and impugned notification no.1778/77-3-08-301N-08 dated 04.07.2008 under section 6 of Land Acquisition Act in respect of petitioner land comprising of Plot Nos.199 area 1.3380 Hect. and 473 area 1.0770 Hect. of the revenue village Itehra, Pargana Dadri, Tehsil Dadri, Disrict Gautam Budh Nagar and the land of the petitioners return back, which was acquired for Public Purpose and transferred to the private builders. 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 on the land comprising of petitioner of the land comprising of Plot Nos.199 area 1.3380 Hect. and 473 area 1.0770 Hect. of the revenue village Itehra, Pargana Dadri, Tehsil Dadri, Disrict Gautam Budh Nagar. iii) To issue any other order of direction which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
(2.) Shri Ramendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection regarding the entertainability of the writ petition. He submits that the writ petition has been filed after more than 6 years from the date of declaration issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and it is highly bared by laches. He submits that even the Full Bench judgment in Gajraj & Ors Vs. State of U.P. & Ors, which decided the bunch of writ petitions was delivered on 21/10/2011, and more than 2 years have elapsed from the judgment of the Full Bench in Gajraj's case which decided the bunch of writ petitions including the writ petition relating to Villate Itehra. In the entire writ petition, the petitioner has not even in any paragraph has given any explanation for delay and laches in approaching the Court.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the land use of the Village Itehra was changed in the year 2010.;