ARUN TANDON, A.P.SAHI, J. - (1.) THE petitioners, in this writ petition, have come up with a prayer for issuance of a mandamus directing the respondents to release the land allegedly belonging to the petitioners and which was subject matter of acquisition under the Notifications dated 25.7.1959 and 23.12.1959 under the Urban Development Act No. 6 of 1945. In the alternative, a prayer has been made for paying the petitioners the entire enhanced amount which has been allegedly earned by the Government by selling the said land and a further claim of enhanced compensation has also been made.
(2.) WE have heard Sri G.N. Verma, learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Counsel for Kanpur Development Authority and learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 4 and 5. The relief claimed in the writ petition is founded on the allegation that inspite of the acquisition having been made, the land has not been utilized and, therefore, in view of the provisions of section 17 (1) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, the Kanpur Development Authority and the State Government be commanded to release the land. It has further been submitted that the respondents could not have transferred the land to organisations like the Steel Authority of India Limited as the same would amount to change of purpose for which the land was acquired and further the possession of the petitioners have not been disturbed with till date, as such, they are entitled for re-entry under sub-section (1) of section 17 of the 1973 Act quoted herein below: "17. Compulsory acquisition of land.-(1) If in the opinion of the State Government, any land is required for the purpose of development, or for any other purpose, under the Act, the State Government may acquire such land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 : Provided that any person, from whom any land is so acquired, may after the expiration of a period of five years from the date of such acquisition apply to the State Government for restoration of that land to him on the ground that the land has not been utilised within the period for the purpose, for which it was acquired and if the State Government is satisfied to that effect it shall order restoration of the land to him on repayment of the charges which were incurred in connection with the acquisition together with interest at the rate of twelve per cent per annum and such development charges, if any, as may have been incurred after acquisition."
(3.) IT is submitted by Sri G.N. Verma that the course adopted by the Development Authority and the State in transferring the land in favour of organisations and a company like the Steel Arthonty of India Limited is in violation of the proposed scheme for which the and vas acquired, namely for a green belt area. An interim order was passed on 21.5.1990 staying the dispossession of the petitioners which was later on modified on 11.7.1990 and the petitioners were directed not to interfere with the possession of the plots which had been purchased by the Steel Authority of India Limited. The writ petition was subsequently admitted on 12.8.1994.;