AJIT SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(ALL)-2017-7-71
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on
July 06,2017
AJIT SINGH
Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
OM PRAKASH SHARMA V. M.P. AUDYOGIK KENDRA VIKAS NIGAM [REFERRED TO]VELAXAN KUMAR V. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRAWATI @ CHANDRI V. STATE OF U.P. [REFERRED TO]
CHARANJIT LAL CHOWDHARY VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. MADAN GOPAL RUNGLA [REFERRED TO]
SAGHIR AHMAD VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. VISHNU PRASAD SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
NAIR SERVICE SOCIETY LIMITED VS. K C ALEXANDER [REFERRED TO]
NAGAR RICE AND FLOUR MILLS VS. N TEEKAPPA GOWDA AND BROS [REFERRED TO]
BAR COUNCIL OF MAHARASHTRA VS. M V DABHOLKAR [REFERRED TO]
LILA RAM BIRLA COTTON SPG AND WVG MILLS VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MYSORE VS. V K KANGAN:NARASIMHA RAM NAIK [REFERRED TO]
MANI SUBRAT JAIN VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATE OF PUNJAB VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
FT GIRDHARAN PRASAD MISSIR VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO:BANDI VENKATARAMA RAO:VALLURI KESAVA RAO [REFERRED TO]
H D VORA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEERUT VS. PISTA DEVI:PISTA DEVI [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA RAM MAHALE DEAD VS. SHOBHA VENKAT RAO [REFERRED TO]
NUTAKKI SESHARATANAM VS. SUB COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION VIJAYAWADA [REFERRED TO]
MADHYA PRADESH HOUSING BOARD VS. MOHAMMAD SHAFI [REFERRED TO]
SATENDRA PRASAD JAIN VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
BABUA RAM GOA DAMAN AND DIU INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION UNION OF INDIA VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH :APPA SHANKAR RAO NAIKS:CHANDGI [REFERRED TO]
GIAN CHAND VS. GOPALA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. DIGAMBAR [REFERRED TO]
MAHAVIR VS. RURAL INSTITUTE AMRAVATI [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS. L KRISHNAN [REFERRED TO]
SNEH PRABHA VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
AJAY KRISHAN SHINGHAL VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA SINGH VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. D R LAXMI [REFERRED TO]
STAR WIRE INDIA LIMITED VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
M S JAYARAJ VS. COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE KERALA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. TARSEM SINGH [REFERRED TO]
GHULAM QADIR VS. SPECIAL TRIBUNAL [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. COLLECTOR [REFERRED TO]
MEERA SAHNI VS. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]
LAXMI RAM PAWAR VS. SITABAI BALU DHOTRE [REFERRED TO]
A SUBASH BABU VS. STATE OF A P [REFERRED TO]
RAM SEWAK VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
BAHORI LAL VS. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER [REFERRED TO]
RAM JIYAWAN VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF SECRETARY VS. MATHAI KURIAKOSE [REFERRED TO]
V CHANDRASEKARAN VS. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER [REFERRED TO]
AYAAUBKHAN NOORKHAN PATHAN VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
PUNE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION VS. HARAKCHAND MISIRIMAL SOLANKI [REFERRED TO]
JAGDEV SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. [REFERRED TO]
SHARMA AGRO INDUSTRIES VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
RAM KISHAN VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI VS. JAGJIT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
LAXMI DEVI VS. STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
ARUN KUMAR DIXIT VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2019-5-199] [REFERRED TO]JANASENA PARTY VS. STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER [LAWS(APH)-2021-5-21] [REFERRED TO]
AI-MOMIN COLLEGE OF EDUCATION KANDUKUR VS. ACHARYA NAGARJUNA UNIVERSITY GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2021-6-28] [REFERRED TO]
VAKACHARLA VEERAIAH VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2021-7-7] [REFERRED TO]
B.SRIDEVI VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2021-11-63] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
DILIP B.BHOSALE,.J. -
(1.)This public interest litigation (PIL) and connected writ petitions, involve common questions of facts and law and, hence, were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The petitioner in PIL claims to be the publisher of a local fortnightly newspaper Sajag Sathi and spokesperson of a Non-Government Organization (Noida Lok Manch). He also claims to be a Press Reporter of the Hindi Daily 'Vishwa Guru'. In the petition (PIL), he seeks the following reliefs:
"(a) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to verify and demarcate (by Barb/Wire fencing) the Defence land, acquired for Air Firing and Bombing Range vide notification dated 6.11.1950 and further take appropriate action against the encroachers and get the land freed/vacated from the clutches of Bhumafias/land grabbers.
(b) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to constitute a High Level Committee to hold and enquiry against the Officers/employees of the District Administration and Defence and get the criminal proceedings launched against the culprits involved in the irregularities.
(c) a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the entire records of respondents nos. 3 and 4 regarding the acquisition of 482 acres land of Village Nagli Nagla and Nagli Sagpur which was made for Air Firing and Bombing Range, Tilpat Range regarding the acquisition, possession, award and its land use.
(d) a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding/directing the Central Bureau of Investigation or any other reliable independent agency to conduct an enquiry in the matter of irregularities, committed by the concerned revenue officials/employees and defence officers in encroachment/grabbing of 482 acres land of Ministry of Defence (Air Firing and Bombing Range, Tilpat Range) acquired vide notification dated 6.11.1950."
(2.)The petitioners in connected writ petitions, who claim to be bona fide purchasers of small pieces of farm land/plots out of the land involved in these petitions, challenge its acquisition that took place in 1950. The prayers made in all petitions are more or less similar. What is common is the prayer challenging acquisition after about 65 years. It would be advantageous to reproduce the prayers made in the leading writ petition bearing Writ-C No 41653 of 2015, which read thus:
"(i) Pass an appropriate order allowing the present writ petition,
(ii) Pass appropriate order(s) to declare the Notifications dated 06.11.1950 and 07.11.1950 under Sections 4 and 6 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for acquisition of 482 acres of private land for public purpose situated in two villages Nagli Nagla (105 acres) and Nagli Sagpur (377 acres) in Pargana-Dadri, Tehsil-Sikandrabad, District-Bulandshahr as deemed lapsed on 01.01.2014.
(iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or appropriate direction(s) to Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 not to execute their threats to interfere in future in any manner whatsoever in possession, use and enjoyment of agriculture/farm land of the Petitioner comprising Khet No. 55M of Khata No. 13 purchased vide registered Sale Deed dated 11.12.2009 having ad-measuring area of 0.3373 hectare (4 bighas) known as 'Raghav Farm' located in Village - Nagla Bahrampur, District and Tehsil - Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. without following due process of law."
(3.)This writ petition (Writ-C No 41653 of 2015) and a writ petition bearing Writ-C No 41620 of 2015 were argued by the petitioners-in-person, who, incidentally are also advocates by profession. Writ-C No 41620 has been filed by nine petitioners. Petitioner No 1 therein argued this petition for himself as well as on behalf of the remaining petitioners. Rest of the petitions were argued by learned counsels on record for the petitioners. All petitioners have agriculture/farm land/plots in the land in question, which they seem to have purchased during the last about 10 years.
;
"(a) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to verify and demarcate (by Barb/Wire fencing) the Defence land, acquired for Air Firing and Bombing Range vide notification dated 6.11.1950 and further take appropriate action against the encroachers and get the land freed/vacated from the clutches of Bhumafias/land grabbers.
(b) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to constitute a High Level Committee to hold and enquiry against the Officers/employees of the District Administration and Defence and get the criminal proceedings launched against the culprits involved in the irregularities.
(c) a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the entire records of respondents nos. 3 and 4 regarding the acquisition of 482 acres land of Village Nagli Nagla and Nagli Sagpur which was made for Air Firing and Bombing Range, Tilpat Range regarding the acquisition, possession, award and its land use.
(d) a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding/directing the Central Bureau of Investigation or any other reliable independent agency to conduct an enquiry in the matter of irregularities, committed by the concerned revenue officials/employees and defence officers in encroachment/grabbing of 482 acres land of Ministry of Defence (Air Firing and Bombing Range, Tilpat Range) acquired vide notification dated 6.11.1950."
(2.)The petitioners in connected writ petitions, who claim to be bona fide purchasers of small pieces of farm land/plots out of the land involved in these petitions, challenge its acquisition that took place in 1950. The prayers made in all petitions are more or less similar. What is common is the prayer challenging acquisition after about 65 years. It would be advantageous to reproduce the prayers made in the leading writ petition bearing Writ-C No 41653 of 2015, which read thus:
"(i) Pass an appropriate order allowing the present writ petition,
(ii) Pass appropriate order(s) to declare the Notifications dated 06.11.1950 and 07.11.1950 under Sections 4 and 6 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for acquisition of 482 acres of private land for public purpose situated in two villages Nagli Nagla (105 acres) and Nagli Sagpur (377 acres) in Pargana-Dadri, Tehsil-Sikandrabad, District-Bulandshahr as deemed lapsed on 01.01.2014.
(iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or appropriate direction(s) to Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 not to execute their threats to interfere in future in any manner whatsoever in possession, use and enjoyment of agriculture/farm land of the Petitioner comprising Khet No. 55M of Khata No. 13 purchased vide registered Sale Deed dated 11.12.2009 having ad-measuring area of 0.3373 hectare (4 bighas) known as 'Raghav Farm' located in Village - Nagla Bahrampur, District and Tehsil - Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. without following due process of law."
(3.)This writ petition (Writ-C No 41653 of 2015) and a writ petition bearing Writ-C No 41620 of 2015 were argued by the petitioners-in-person, who, incidentally are also advocates by profession. Writ-C No 41620 has been filed by nine petitioners. Petitioner No 1 therein argued this petition for himself as well as on behalf of the remaining petitioners. Rest of the petitions were argued by learned counsels on record for the petitioners. All petitioners have agriculture/farm land/plots in the land in question, which they seem to have purchased during the last about 10 years.
;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.