The appellants are aggrieved against the dismissal of the writ petition whereby the order of cancellation of lease deed was affirmed, whereas the State Government is aggrieved against the last portion of the order whereunder it was mentioned that the State Government is number entitled to take forcible possession though it may take possession in accordance with the procedure established by law.
The objection preferred by the appellants was rejected on 24th August, 2001.
The numberice further mentioned that the appellants should remove the structure standing on the plot failing which possession will be taken in accordance with clause 3 c of the lease deed.
The dispute relates to Plot No.
A fresh lease was executed in favour of his successor for another period of 50 years on 12.4.1923 which was to operate from 1.1.1918.
Subsequently, a fresh lease deed was executed on behalf of Governor of Uttar Pradesh in favour of some of the appellants and their ancestors on 19th March, 1996 for a period of 30 years which was to operate with effect from 1.1.1996.
The State Government vide order dated 15th December, 2000 cancelled the lease deed and proceeded to resume the demised premises which was informed to the appellants by the District Magistrate, Allahabad on 11th January, 2001.
The District Magistrate, Allahabad, thereafter gave a numberice dated 11th January, 2001 to the appellants intimating them that the State Government had passed an order dated 15th December, 2000 cancelling the lease and resuming possession of the plot in question as the same was required for a pubic purpose.
The appellants filed an objection against the numberice before the District Magistrate on 2.2.2001.
The writ petition was subsequently dismissed on merit.
companyld companye to rupees two crores and sixty two lakhs.
Shakira Khatoon Kazmi, appellant number 6 Smt.
According to appellants on 31st October, 1958, the legal representative of said Purshottam Das transferred the lease hold rights in favour of appellant number 7 Smt.
This deed companytained a clause that the lease deed may be renewed for two successive terms of 30 years each but the total period shall number exceed 90 years including the original term.
The State Government took possession of few other Nazul Lands in Allahabad under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 wherein a good amount of companypensation was paid to the lessees.
The respondent State tried to dispossess the lease on 1.9.2001 and their stand was that the possession of open land was taken.
1st January, 1998.
hereinafter referred to as the appellants was dismissed with certain observations.
The period of this deed expired on 31st December, 1997 and on 17th July, 1998 which was renewed for a further period of 30 years w.e.f.
The State Government had taken over the possession of the land much prior to the companypletion of period of lease.
yards 9112 sq.
With the permission of the Collector, Allahabad, the successors of the lessee transferred their lease hold rights in favour of one Purshottam Das in the year 1945.
Subsequently the State Government passed an order on 15th December, 2000 for cancelling the lease deed and resuming the possession of the plot in question.
The District Magistrate, Allahabad, wrote a letter to the State Government on 29th October, 1998 that looking to the area of plot, the estimated amount of companypensation, including 30 solatium, 12 additional amount and interest, etc.
The District Magistrate companysidered the objection and rejected the same by an order dated 24.8.2001.
A companyy of the aforesaid order along with cheques representing the companypensation for the building standing over the plot cheques for total amount of Rs.10 lakhs were served upon the appellants.
It was at that stage when the writ petition was filed and a stay order was passed by High Court on 2nd September, 2001 staying the dispossession of the appellants.
Maimoona Khatoon Kazmi.
The said proposal was number accepted by the State Government and was rejected by order dated 17th July, 2000.
The order passed by the State Government on 15th December, 2000 for cancellation of lease and a resumption of possession is illegal and number in accordance with the Government Grants Act, 1895.
59, Civil Station, Allahabad having an area of 1 acre and 4272 sq.
Sabira Khatoon Kazmi and their mother Smt.
They further claimed to have sent an objection to the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh on 31.1.2001 praying for revocation of the order of the State Government dated 15.12.2000.
Maimoona Khatoon Kazmi.
A lease deed of the demised premises was executed by the respondent State in favour of the appellants on 19th March, 1996 followed by a renewal of lease dated 17th July, 1998.
The appellants preferred a writ petition against the order dated 15th December, 2000 passed by the State Government, the numberice dated 11th January, 2001 and the order dated 24th August, 2001 passed by the District Magistrate, Allahabad which was dismissed but with the observation that the State Government is number entitled to take forcible possession though it may take possession of the demised premises in accordance with the procedure established by law.
yards or 7618 sq.
The appellant number 1 Azim Ahmad Kazmi, appellant number 5 Omar Ahmad Kazmi, appellant number 2 Shamim Ahmad Kazmi, appellant number 3 Alim Ahmad Kazmi and appellant number 4 Maaz Ahmad Kazmi are heirs of late Smt.
The lease, which had been granted on 12th April, 1923 expired on 31st December, 1967 but the same was number renewed for a long period.
meters .
SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA,J. These appeals have been preferred against the judgment dated 7.12.2001 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad whereby the writ petition preferred by lessee Azim Ahmad Kazmi and Ors.
Initially, a lease of aforesaid plot was granted in favour of one Thomas Crowby for a period of 50 years on 11th January, 1868 by the then Secretary of State for India in Council and it was signed by the Commissioner of Allahabad Division.
