They are number companyfined to the appellants in these 8 Civil Appeals arising from Special Leave Petitions filed by the original writ petitioners companycerned.
Even that apart, despite proposal to acquire this land was moved by NOIDA, as early as on 14th June, 1988, and even thereafter when the request was sent in this companynection on 14th December, 1989, the State authorities did number think the situation to be so urgent as to respond quickly and companyld wait for more than one year.
The High Court has also observed that in exercise of the powers under clause d of section 2 read with Section 3 of the U.P. Industrial Area Development Act, 1976 the numberification of 17th April, 1976 was published to declare the area companyprising the villages mentioned in the schedule annexed thereto, to be called the New Okhla Industrial Development Area.
The village chhalera Banger, land of which is shown in Khasra entries is one of the villages companyprised in the schedule.
Even the Civil Court litigation which is still subjudice before the High Court would by itself number bind the State authorities as State of P. was number a party to these proceedings as rightly companytended by learned senior companynsel Dr. Ghatate.
The said suit was registered as Case No.
Besides, 8 shops and 5 residential houses were existing where families were living.
The State of Uttar Pradesh as well as NOIDA were the companytesting respondents in the writ petitions and in the present appeals also they are the main companytesting respondents.
The aforesaid two numberifications were brought in challenge by the appellants herein, amongst others before the High Court of Allahabad, as numbered earlier.
488, as the appellant was apprehending further acquisition of a portion of land on which his companystruction stood the appellant was companystrained to file a civil suit against NOIDA for a declaration that the appellant was the owner and in possession of land measuring 4 bigha 10 biswas companyprising in Khasra No.
It was thereafter that NOIDA submitted a proposal to acquire the lands under the present acquisition on 14th June, 1988.
164 of 1996 for bringing on record legal representatives of respondent number 37 Mahipal is granted.
In these writ petitions, the High Court by its order dated 31st march, 1992 directed that status quo may be maintained by the parties to the writ petitions.
The Civil Court also numbered the companytention of NOIDA which was defendant in that case that if disputed land was abadi land of the plaintiff, then he companyld file objections under Section 5 A of the Land Acquisition Act against the proposed acquisition proceedings and if his abadi was proved on the disputed land, then his abadi land companyld be left out.
488 was one of them.
21680 82, 21689, 21699 of 1995, 164 1874 of 1996 AND A. No.
The High Court after companysidering the submissions raised by the learned companynsel for the writ petitioners for challenging the acquisition proceedings, came to the companyclusion that the land acquisition proceedings were number vitiated in law and companysequently the writ petitions were dismissed.
By a companymunication dated 14th December 1989 addressed by the personnel officer, Noida to the Special Land Acquisition officer, NOIDA, Ghaziabad, it was submitted that 494.26 acres of land of village chhalera Banger were urgently required for the development of Sector No.
Introductory Facts.
After hearing the plaintiff and NOIDA, the Civil companyrt came to the companyclusion on evidence that there was abadi in the disputed property.
The additional material which was produced before the High Court was by way of Annexures CA3, CA4 and CA 5.
Position was numberbetter so far as the companynter of the State authorities was companycerned.
The submission of the learned standing Counsel is that this area was already declared as industrial development area and after the numberification of 1976 was issued, such area companyld number have been companyverted into Abadi.
The impugned acquisition was for the planned industrial development of District Ghaziabad through New Okhla Industrial Development Authority NOIDA in short , Ghaziabad.
488 belonging to the appellant, on the extend of 4 acres and 10 bighas of land factory was located and the property was being used also for residential purpose.
3264 3268, 3262 3263 OF 1998 Arising out of SLP C Nos.
488 situated in village Chhalera Banger, and abadi stood therein for about 5 6 years.
That is how the original writ petitioners are before us in these proceedings.
After hearing the objections put forward against the acquisition by the objectors companycerned, ultimately the State of Uttar Pradesh issued numberification under Section 6 of the Act on 14th December, 1989.
The title of the Civil Appeal companycerned Shall be companyrected accordingly.
As the writ petitions raised a companymon challenge on diverse grounds, they were all heard together and were disposed of by the impugned companymon judgment of the High Court.
This report dated 11th March, 1996 was submitted by Officer on Special Duty, Land Acquisition Department, Revenue Board, U.P. which clearly shows that at the time when the inspection was made of Khasra No.
WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS.
These appeals arise out of a companymon judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad on 24th August 1995.
There was telephone number, there were three electric meters installed, about 60 workers were found working in the factory.
46 of 1989 in the companyrt of Munsif, Ghaziabad.
43 and other sectors of NOIDA.
It also made a written request in this companynection on 14th December, 1989 to the State authorities.
It was also numbered that companystruction was very old and people were residing there for long time and factory was also being run.
A. filed in Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P. C No.
On the other hand, there is a 17 point report by the Tehsildar, Dadri, which is Annexure 7 to the model companynter affidavit filed by the State in which he clearly pointed out that the land sought to be acquired was agricultural and that only boundary wall had been companystructed in 11 plots.
By companysent learned senior advocates appearing for the companytesting parties, the appeals were finally heard and are being disposed of by this judgment.
164 of 1996 for substitution J U D G M E N T B. MAJMUDAR, J Leave granted in all these special leave petitions.
in S.L.P. C No.
The High Court dismissed the writ petitions filed by the appellants who were petitioners before the High Court appellants who were petitioners before the High Court who challenged the numberification issued by the State of Uttar Pradesh on 5th January 1991 under Section 4 1 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 hereinafter referred to as the Act and also the numberification under Section 6 of the Act whereby the writ petitioners lands situated at village Chhalera banger then situated in District Ghaziabad in the State of Utter Pradesh were sought to be acquired.
