- (1.) After the order of this Court dated 06.07.2012, meetings were convened by the Committee constituted by the State Government to resolve the issue and dispute raised by some of the persons. The meetings were convened on 16.07.2012, 19.07.2012 and then ultimately on 29.07.2012. However, no report has been submitted by the State Government but a second additional affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State Government stating above facts. In the affidavit it has also been stated that the villagers claimed for return of the land and they were apprised about the Court's order and also about the legal position. However, in the affidavit it has been prayed that six weeks time may be granted. Learned Advocate General submitted that there is crop sowing on the land in question here and there and some portion of the boundary wall of I.I.M. has been broken in past but so far as property of the National Law University is concerned, for that there is no disturbance.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that at present the construction of building of National Law University can be assured by the State Government.
(3.) We are making it clear that our efforts, even after passing of the order by this Court rejecting the claim of the erstwhile land holders or their descendants and even after rejection of their claim by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, are only on humanitarian ground so that the persons who have been misled by some miscreants, may not suffer because of their own ignorance and this indulgence may not be treated to be a concession given by the Court in any manner either to the said claimants or miscreants or even to the Government. Since, presently we do not have report of the Committee, therefore, we are not making more comments.;