- (1.) Brahm Singh and three others are before this Court assailing the validity of the impugned notice dated 14.10.2015 published on 25.10.2015 issued by respondent No. 4 (Secretary, U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow) and for direction to the respondents not to dispossess the applicants/petitioners from their land in dispute i.e. Khasra No. 102/1, 202/2, 114/1, 114/2, 115 and 116 situate in Village Mohiuddinpur, Kanawani, Pargana -Loni, Tehsil Dadri, Distt. Gautam Budh Nagar.
(2.) It transpires from the record that a large area was acquired by the U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow (in short "the Parishad") for scheme known as "Delhi road and Hindan cut between Bhumi Vikas Evam Grihsthan Yozna No. 3, Ghaziabad" (in short "the scheme in question") for solving the acute housing problem in Ghaziabad Town. Consequently, a notice under Sec. 28 of the U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Act, 1965 (in short, "the Act of 1965") was issued on 26.6.1982. In the said notification, the petitioners' Khasra Nos. 10, 57, 102, 115 and 116 were also proposed to be acquired. Thereafter, notice under Sec. 32 of the Act of 1965 was also issued on 28.2.1987. It has also been reflected from the record that notice under Sec. 9 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 had also been issued to the tenure holders for filing their objections. Thereafter, the petitioners had proceeded to file objection before the Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO). Through their objections the petitioners had prayed for exclusion of their land from the acquisition. It is relevant to indicate that at the same time, the petitioners while filing their objections, had also proposed that in case their land were to be acquired, then they claim the compensation at the rate of Rs. 250/ - per sq. yard. Each and every objections were considered in detail and finally the award was made on 27.2.1989. The details have also been furnished in paragraphs 17, 18 and 19 of the writ petition regarding compensation. The compensations were made regarding Khasra Nos. 10, 57, 102, 115 and 116. It also appears that certain excess amount had been paid, which were returned by the petitioners and at present the petitioner are disputing that the compensation of Rs. 2,03,364.05 was paid to the petitioners only of Khasra No. 10 and 57 but as far as Khasra No. 102, 115 and 116 are concerned, no compensation has been paid till date. It has also been alleged that the respondents had adopted pick and choose policy, certain lands were exempted from the acquisition and even the land of M/s. Ram Prasth Builders was also released by the authority concerned.
(3.) At present the petitioners are before this court challenging the proceedings, which are initiated under Sec. 13(3) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (in short "the Act of 1973") precisely on the ground that at the time of notice under Sec. 28 of the Act of 1965 the public purpose was shown for the construction of house, but now at present in the garb of the present impugned notice the respondent authorities have proceeded to change the Master Plan 2021 and now they have proceeded for establishment of IT Park. The respondents have further proceeded to sell out the land in question to the private builders and IT companies. As such the Parishad has deviated from the actual purpose for which the land was acquired in the year 1982 and now by this act the Parishad is making profit by selling the acquired land, which was meant for public purpose, on higher price to the private builders and companies and has frustrated the purpose for which the land was acquired. Therefore, the Court must come to rescue and reprieve of the petitioners.;