- (1.) The present writ petition has been filed by one Major Jasbinder Singh Bala claiming certain reliefs which arise out of the judgment dated 29.4.2002 in L.A.R. No. 421 of 1992 under Section 30 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). His claim is that while deciding the issue of apportionment of the compensation under Section 30, apportionment has wrongly been made in favour Ram and Gajraj respondents No. 4 and 5 respectively, depriving him from getting compensation after due apportionment. He has therefore made the following prayers 1 to 4: i, issue a writ order or direction in the nature of writ of prohibition restraining the respondents from disbursement of amount awarded in pursuance of judgment dated 29.4.2002 in L.A.R. No. 421 of 1992 under Section 30 of Land Acquisition Act, during the pendency of Reference 18 of the Act between the parties. ii. issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus to declaration of the amount of Rs. 22,74,966.28 paise on the basis of impugned judgment dated 29.4.2002 in favour of respondent No. 4 and 5 in the proceedings Under Section 30 decided like a declaratory suit by setting aside the registered sale deed executed on 25.11.1968 as unconstitutional and void. iii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 17.8.2002 passed by respondent No. 6 rejecting the transfer application No. 397 of 2002. iv. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus in the alternative that proceedings of review application No. 31 of 2002 may kindly be directed to be decided by some other Addl. District Judge in view of the fact that matter was referred to the Hon'ble Chief 3ustice for initiating an enquiry and for directing the same to be decided by the Court nominated by District 3udge, Ghaziabad.
(2.) From these prayers, it is abundantly clear that the petitioner feels aggrieved that the compensation has been wrongly apportioned between the respondents no 4 and 5 and he has wrongly been deprived of the same as he claims that he is also entitled to get the compensation and therefore a writ of prohibition be issued restraining the respondents-authorities from disbursing the amount in pursuance of the judgment and order dated 29.4.2002 in L.A.R. No. 421o1992.
(3.) The second prayer is that this Court may issue a writ of mandamus to declare, that the amount of Rs. 22 lakhs and odd which has been awarded in favour of the respondents No. 4 and 5 in the proceedings impeached herein, as unconstitutional and to declare the sale deed dated 25.11.1968 a nullity.;