- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.V. Chaudhary, learned counsel representing the private respondents and Sri Manish Mishra, learned counsel representing the State-respondents.
(2.) By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for following the reliefs:- "(i) That by means of a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other suitable writ, order or direction in the said nature, the impugned letter dated 3.10.2001, issued by the opposite party No.3 and contained in Annexure No.13 to the writ petition, thereby directing the Bank concerned not to make payment of compensation in respect of Voucher No.11 dated 15.9.2001, for a sum of Rs.32,23,759.60 p., may kindly be quashed. ii) That by means of a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other suitable writ, order or direction in the said nature, the opposite parties be commanded to make payment of full amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.48,70,784/- determined by the opposite party No.3 in his Award dated 14.9.2001 in respect of the land of Plots No.471, 472 and 477, situated at Village Sheikhpur, Pargana, Tahsil and District Lucknow, acquired under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, together with Solatium @ 30%, additional compensation @ 12% from the date of Notification, till the date of actual possession alongwith interest expeditiously within the time fixed by this Hon'ble Court irrespective of the directions, contained in the impugned letter dated 3.10.2001. iii) That by means of a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other suitable writ, order or direction in the said nature, the opposite parties be commanded not to make payment of compensation determined in the Award dated 14.9.2001 in respect of the land to any other person except to the petitioner, who is the proprietor/absolute owner of such land and in whose favour the compensation for such land has been awarded in the aforesaid Award. iv) That any other appropriate writ, order or direction to which the petitioner is held entitled under the entire facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed. v) That cost of the writ petition be also awarded to the petitioner."
(3.) Sri U.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Voucher No.10 for an amount of Rs.8,24,814.65 was paid to the petitioner as part of the compensation, however, payment of Voucher No.11 although prepared in the name of the petitioner, has been stopped by the impugned order.;