S.K.Singh, Ashok Srivastava - (1.) HEARD Sri H. R. Mishra assisted by Sri K. M. Mishra in support of the petition and Sri Shandilya learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel who appeared for the State authority.
(2.) CHALLENGE in this writ petition is the order passed by the District Collector, Allahabad dated 26.4.2008 by which the application filed by the petitioners for getting the land in question freehold has been rejected. At the very outset it is to be mentioned that although there were several applicants but the Court is informed that the petitioners alone have challenged the impugned order and this has been stated in paragraph 13 of the counter-affidavit also. For disposal of writ petition facts in brief will suffice.
(3.) PETITIONERS and other applicants applied for getting the land known as Nazul Land No. 129 Civil Station freehold. One Satyawati Devi was original lessee of the land and it is on her death by means of subsequent development as will be noticed shortly, the application for getting the land freehold was moved which has been rejected which is subject-matter of challenge. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that Satyawati Devi, who died on 3.8.1986, being original lessee executed a registered Will in favour of Ram Babu Sharma, who died in the year 1996 and before his death he also executed a registered Will in favour of Phool Kumari and Suresh Sharma and others and these persons nominated the petitioners on 27.6.2002 to get the land in question freehold in their favour and the possession of the same was also handed over to them after receiving the full and final consideration for which a receipt dated 11.6.2002 is there. The claim is that on the basis of the nomination, petitioners applied for freehold on 3.7.2002 and at that time the policy mentioned in the Government order dated 1.12.1998 was in operation permitting the freehold in favour of the nominee also subject to various other conditions so provided in that policy. The application for getting free hold was decided after a long time, i.e., by impugned order dated 26.4.2008 and the learned Collector applied the policy/norms so applicable in view of the Government order dated 17.3.2008 which is clearly erroneous.;