- (1.) B. M. Lal, J. This decision rendered in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 4477 of 1997, shall govern disposal of Writ Petitions No. 4453 and 4476 of 1997, referred above.
(2.) BY these three writ petitions, the petitioners who claim to be occupants of the controversial Site No. 34 Bungalow No. 30/38, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad, have brought an action before this Court seeking exercise of writ jurisdic tion against the Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad and its officers, con tending that they are being unauthorisedly and illegally dispossessed from their premises through coercive process of bulldozing. It appears that aforesaid Site No. 34, Civil Station Allahabad is a Nazul land in respect of which a lease was granted in favour of one Mr. A. Robert Fery Smith by the concerned authorities of the State in the year 1910, which appears to have expired on 31st December, 1958. However, for deter mination of actual controversy involved in these petitions, this Court need not go into that much detailed facts. The said Site No. 34, Civil Station, Allahabad was acquired by the State Government by issuing notifica tions under Sections 4 (1) of the Land Ac quisition Act read with Section 17 (1) of the Act for establishment of Commercial Dis trict Centre under the development Scheme in district Allahabad by the Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad. The said acquisition proceedings were chal lenged before this Court by means of Writ No. 6697 of 1987 and Writ No. 6701 of 1986, which have been dismissed on 19-2-91 and 30-1-1997 respectively. Immediately there after i. e. on 31-1-1997, Allahabad Develop ment Authority came in motion and started demolition in the acquired area and the occupants/petitioners taken shelter of this Court. According to the petitioners, neither they are trespassers nor illegal occupants rather they are occupants of the premises in question by virtue of tenancy created in their favour and therefore, they are residing as well as carrying on their business in the premises in question.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submitted that without giving notice to the petitioners as required by Section 27 of U. P. Urban Planning and Development Act and without following the principles of Audial-teram Partem and without giving any warn ing, the Allahabad Development Authority started bulldozing their premises in ques tion and therefore, petitioner's fundamen tal right to have roofs over their heads have been violated. While filing counter-affidavit the Allahabad Development Authority emerged with the plea that the original lease granted expired on 31st December, 1958 and thereafter it was never extended or renewed, and the petitioners have no legal or fundamental right to remain in posses sion over the premises in question as it has been acquired by the State Government for Allahabad Development Authority under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act and the notifications issued under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act and Rules framed there under were given due publicity in the newspapers having wide cir culation in the city of Allahabad, such as 'northern India Patrika' and Amrit Prabhat' dated 9-3- 1986 and 10-3-86 respectively. The notices under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act were also issued on 9-3-1986. The writ petitions referred above whereby the acquisition proceedings were challenged, have been dismissed by this Court.;