Allahabad High Court

: Anurag Narain Srivastava, Anshuman Singh, Ashok Kumar Singh, Shailendra Kumar Misra : Ratnesh Chandra, Amit Kumar Singh, Ashish Kumar, Namit Sharma, Sameer Kumar Upadhyay, Sharad Pathak Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

1. Heard Sri Anshuman Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ratnesh Chandra, who appears on behalf of opposite parties no.1 and 2, Sri Namit Sharma, who appears on behalf of opposite party no.3 and Sri Sharad Pathak, who appears on behalf of opposite party no.4.

2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "1. A writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 30.04.2024 passed by respondent no.2 in relation to Plot No.1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow contained as Annexure No.1 to this writ petition. II) A writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents directing them not to a lot Plot No.1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow belonging to the petitioner to anyone.”

3. It is the case of the petitioner as set up in the writ petition that his father Kaushal Kishore Shukla had earlier filed Writ Petition No.8426 (MB) of 2009 in relation to House No.A-1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow challenging the order dated 12.08.2009 passed by the Lucknow Development Authority. The 2 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 said writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution on 07.03.2024. Father of the petitioner has filed a recall application on 11.03.2024, which is pending for consideration, in which counsel for opposite party no.4 got an adjournment on 26.04 .2024. It is also stated that Writ Petition No.1970 (MB) of 2001 was filed by the father of opposite party no.4, Sri V.D. Keshari against the Lucknow Development Authority and this writ petition was clubbed with Writ Petition No.8426 (MB) of 2009 and was decided by this Court vide order dated 07.03.2024 directing the Lucknow Development Authority to consider the representation of the petitioner-V.D. Keshari.

4. It is also the case of the petitioner that his father was an ex- Army person and one plot of land in Gram Sabha, Khargapur, Husariya measuring 8 Biswa was given to him by the 2 pattas executed on 21.12.1973 and 02.09.1981. The plot in question i.e. 1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar has been developed after the Lucknow Development Authority has taken over the Gram Sabha land of Village Khargapur, Husariya. It has been stated that petitioner's father Late Kaushal Kishore Shukla constructed a house for his family, which was numbered as House No.54 of Village Husariya and the name of the family members of Late Kaushal Kishore Shukla were shown in Pariwar Register of Gram Sabha Khargapur, Husariya. The Gram Sabha had passed a resolution in favour of Late Kaushal Kishore Shukla as he being Hawaldar in Indian Army fought Indo-Pakistan War in the year 1971 and had received a special service medal with clasp while serving in Indian Peace Keeping Force at Srilanka. It has been stated in the writ petition that the house constructed by the father of the petitioner was assessed by the Nagar Mahapalika in the year 1992 and the Nagar Nigam issued House Number as 1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar to the father of the petitioner. The Nagar Nigam is collecting the house tax from the father of the petitioner since 2002. The Gomti Nagar Scheme was handed over to the Nagar Nigam by the Lucknow Development Authority in the year 2007. 3 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024

5. It is stated in the writ petition that under Section 198(4) of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act only the Collector is empowered to cancel the patta if any irregularities found thereon and such patta can be cancelled after issuing a show cause notice and the limitation for cancellation of such patta is five years. However, no such show cause notice was ever issued by the Collector to the father of the petitioner since the inception of pattas dated 21.12.1973 and 02.09.1981. It has further been stated that the requirement of approval of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was added only in the year 1975 and before 1975, the prior approval for grant of patta was not required. The Lucknow Development Authority has got no statutory authority to cancel or ignore the pattas granted by the Gram Sabha in violation of Section 198(4), (5) and (6) of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. It has also been stated that although the petitioner has been threatened to be thrown out from his plot while the other similarly situated nine persons/patta holders were adjusted by providing them the housing sites over their patta land.

6. It has also been stated that the petitioner and his family has been in continuous possession over Plot No.1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar for the past 51 years and his father had constructed the house over the said plot of land of Khasra No.88 of Village Khargapur, Husariya. Further submission has been made that V.D. Keshari, father of opposite party no.4 had applied for LIG house in Tikait Rai Housing Scheme of Lucknow Development Authority, but surprisingly his allotment was shifted to Gomti Nagar Scheme against the rules and he was given 5.810 Sq. Ft. of land in the posh area of Gomti Nagar and besides this, his wife Smt. Kamla Keshari was also allotted Plot No.A-3/272, Vishwas Khand. Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. It is stated that both the spouses cannot be allotted house or plot in the same city by the Lucknow Development Authority as it is against the Rules.

7. It has also been stated that a resolution was passed by the 4 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 Lucknow Development Authority in its Board meeting on 27.11.1998 that patta holders of earlier Gram Sabha land would be adjusted against their plots after taking the development charges. The Lucknow Development Authority has taken over such land without payment of compensation, but this resolution was never acted upon in relation to the petitioner. However, other patta holders were adjusted. It has also been stated that one query was made by the father of the petitioner from the Lucknow Development Authority with regard illegal allotment to the father of opposite party no.4, but it has been informed that application of V.D. Keshari is undated and was accepted sometimes in 1988, whereas Vineet Khand allotment had been started only in the year 1989. It is not clear as to how in the year 1988 A Type plot of 5810 Sq. Ft. was allotted to V.D. Keshari. It has also been stated in the writ petition that House No.1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar is not situated over Khasra No.88, but it is situated over Khasra No.55, whereas no survey was done to find out on which Khasra plot number House No.1/205 Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar is situated. The Public Information Officer and the report of the Lucknow Development Authority submitted before the Grievance Committee of Vidhan Sabha has been filed as Annexure-21 to the writ petition.

8. Initially, when the writ petition was filed, counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Lucknow Development Authority were heard and notices were issued to opposite party no.4 and the Court had observed that till the next date of listing the petitioner shall not evicted from the house and no demolition of the house shall be carried out. The petitioner was also restrained from raising any new construction or creating any third party rights on the plot in dispute. Later on, an application for recall of that order was filed by the counsel for opposite party no.4, namely, C.M. Application No.2 of 2024, wherein it was stated that in pursuance of allotment made by the Lucknow Development Authority, the entire consideration was deposited in the year 1999. The Court after going through the affidavit 5 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 filed in support of the application for recall, modified its order dated 07.05.2024 to the extent that house of the father of petitioner, which is constructed only upon 645 Sq. Ft. of land and the appurtenant land thereto admeasuring only 2 Biswa as alleged to have been granted by way of patta by the Gram Sabha concerned, shall not be disturbed. The rest of the land, which is in dispute, was directed to be demarcated and handed over to the allottees, who have already paid the entire sale consideration to the Lucknow Development Authority. The Court also directed the listing of the writ petition along with the record of Writ Petition No.8426 (MB) of 2009, Kaushal Kishore Shukla Vs. Lucknow Development Authority and others, and Writ Petition No.1970 (MB) of 2001, V.D. Keshari Vs. Lucknow Development Authority and others, and 1701 (MB) of 1998, Kaushal Kishore Shukla Vs. Lucknow Development Authority and others, decided on 11.06.1998.

9. Today, all the writ petitions are listed and the record has been sent by the office. Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for adjournment, however, counsel for the Lucknow Development Authority and counsel for opposite party no.4 have vehemently opposed the prayer for adjournment on the ground that they have filed counter affidavits indicating the misrepresentation and concealment of material facts by the petitioner.

10. Counsel for opposite party no.4 has referred to counter affidavit filed by him on 28.09.2024, wherein it has been stated that the petitioner has not given reference of earlier writ petition filed by him and also the Original Suit No.233 of 1995 filed by the petitioner's father against the Lucknow Development Authority, in which interim injunction application was rejected by the court of Munsif Hawali, Lucknow on 21.03.1998. A copy of the plaint filed in Original Suit No.233 of 1995 as well as the orders passed on 25.04.1995 and 31.03.1998 have been filed as Annexures to the counter affidavit. A true copy of the Writ Petition No.1701 (MB) of 1998 has also been filed as Annexure 6 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 to the counter affidavit along with a copy of the order dated 21.03.1998 passed in the aforesaid writ petition.

11. Counsel for opposite party no.4 by pointing out the plaint of Regular Suit No.233 of 1995, which has been filed as Annexure to the counter affidavit, and has stated that in paragraph-1 of such plaint, the petitioner’s father had stated that Khasra No.88 Min. admeasuring 8 Biswa in Village Khargapur Husariya was allotted to him in 1973 by the Gram Sabha Khargapur Husariya as housing patta and the plaintiff-Kaushal Kishore Shukla was given the possession in 1973 by the Gram Panchayat and he built his house in 1980 over the said housing site. A boundary wall was also constructed. The plaintiff-Kaushal Kishore Shukla had planted 40 Eucalyptus Trees, 8 Mango Trees, 3 Guava Trees, 10 Poplar Trees and 10 other trees in the open land surrounding his house. On the northern side of the plot, the boundaries mentioned as sadak sarkari. An allegation was made against the defendant-Lucknow Development Authority that they had tried to interfere in the possession of the plaintiff on various dates and an attempt was made to demolish the house and the boundary wall. The disputed house/property was situated in Khasra No.88. Further, it has been pointed out from the writ petition that was filed earlier by the petitioner's father in 1998, a copy of which has been filed as annexure to the counter affidavit, that in the said writ petition, father of the petitioner had stated that the respondents are threatening to demolish House No.3, Village Husariya, Post Office Maleseman, Lucknow, now also known as Vineet Khand-I, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow and that the petitioner has constructed a house on the plot of land on 02.09.1981. The entire plot was measuring 6 Biswa after getting permission and patta from the Gram Sabha Khargapur, Husariya, Lucknow. The then Pradhan of the Gram Sabha had given patta on 02.09.1981. There is no mention in the said writ petition of alleged earlier patta granted in 1973 and 2 Bigha land for housing purposes in the said writ petition. The said writ petition was disposed of on the first day itself by this 7 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 Court by observing that counsel for the Lucknow Development Authority has stated that the Lucknow Development Authority would act only in accordance with law.

12. It has been submitted that the later writ petition that was filed i.e. Writ Petiton 20. Put up tomorrow. 20. Put up tomorrow. 8426 (MB) of 2009 praying for a writ in the 20. Put up tomorrow. nature of Certiorari quashing Annexure-1, which is a letter dated 12.08.2009 issued by the Under Secretary, Lucknow Development Authority indicating that the earlier letters which have been issued on 12.11.2008 and the reply given by the father of the petitioner on 13.11.2008, wherein he has stated that Plot No.A-1/205 Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar may be taken from him and it its place, father of the petitioner may be adjusted by giving a plot to him in Gomti Nagar Vistar Yojana @ current rate of 112.50 Sq. Mtr., but the father of the petitioner was not given any consent for such adjustment. Father of the petitioner was informed that registry has to be made in favour of the allottee of plot in Gomti Nagar Vistar Yojana @ 11 2.50 Sq. Mtr. In case no such consent is given, then demolition of the petitioner's encroachment would be done. Further prayer was made for issuance of a Mandamus to regularize the occupancy of House No.1-205 Vineet Khand in favour of the father of the petitioner after taking requisite development charges and a prayer was further made for quashing the allotment order made in favour of opposite party no.2 i.e. father of opposite party no.4-V.D. Keshari.

13. In the said writ petition, no order was passed when it was taken up as fresh on 31.08.2009 because of the reported illness of Sri D.R. Singh, counsel for the petitioner. In fact, in the said writ petition, no interim order was granted and the Court noted in its order dated 08.01.2020 that since from the last several dates, the case was being adjourned on the non-availability of counsel for the petitioner, as such, the case would not be adjourned on the next date. However, the matter was adjourned 8 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 again on the request of counsel for the petitioner and thereafter amendment application was filed for substituting the legal heirs of the deceased petitioner. The substitution application was allowed and the impleadment of opposite party no.2 was also allowed. The matter came to be dismissed for want of prosecution on 07.03.20204. Since Writ Petition No.8426 (MB)of 2009 was listed along with writ petition filed by V.D. Keshari, namely, Writ Petition No.1970 (MB) of 2001, while the writ petition filed by the petitioner's father was dismissed for want of prosecution, writ petition filed by the father of opposite party no.4 was also disposed of with the observation that in case a representation is moved by V.D. Keshari to the Vice- Chairman/Secretary, Lucknow Development Authority raising his grievance and annexing therewith all the documents in support of his claim, the same shall be considered and take a decision in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks from the date of a certified copy of the order dated 07.03.2024 was produced before him.

14. Writ Petition No.1970 (MB) of 2001 filed by the father of opposite party no.4 was only for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding opposite parties to perform its legal obligations by executing and registering the deed of conveyance in respect of Plot No.A-1/205, Vineet Khand and to deliver its vacant possession to the petitioner after removal of entrancement thereon.

15. Counsel for opposite party no.4 while arguing the matter on merits has submitted further that the petitioner in his writ petiti on has stated that the house was constructed by his father on Khasra No.88. However, a survey was done by a joint team of revenue officials and the officials of the Lucknow Development Authority and it was found that house of the father of the petitioner had actually been constructed over Khasra No.55, which land had already been acquired by notification issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the U.P. Land Acquisition Act and the 9 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 compensation has been paid to the recorded tenure holders. It has also been stated that petitioner concealed the report of the Consolidation Officer dated 27.04.2024, wherein it is apparent that the land upon which the petitioner’s father had constructed the house was on Khasra No.55 and not on Khasra No.88. Actually, major portion of Khasra No.88 is lying vacant, upon which illegal encroachments have been made by some other villagers. It has been argued that it appears that when the colony was developed, the petitioner moved towards the main road by leaving the land, on which he was claiming to be allotted a housing patta. It has also been submitted that patta that has been relied upon to have been issued in favour of Kaushal Kishore Shukla, is apparently not a genuine housing allotment as the father of the petitioner was working as Hawaldar and was not Below Poverty Line and he belongs to general category, therefore, he was not falling within any of the category as provided under Section 198(F) of the UPZA & LR Act.

16. It has also been submitted that petitioner's father had claimed that patta had been given to him by the Gram Sabha on 15 .12.1973 for 2 Biswa of land and then again in 1981 for 6 Biswa of land i.e. total 8 Biswa land is alleged to have been allotted to the petitioner's father. The 1981 patta is apparently in violation of the amended provisions of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, which requires prior permission of the Assistant Collector or in-charge of such division for grant of patta and by that time father of the petitioner was not landless and not Below Poverty Line. It has also been stated that presently petitioners are in possession almost 7000 Sq.Ft. of land and it is situated in the main road in front of Jaipuria School and the construction of the petitioners only 645.50 Sq.Ft., whereas the major part is of Tin Shade. On the other hand, father of opposite party no.4 was a retired judicial officer and he was allotted 540 Sq. Mtrs. Land, which comes to about 5810 Sq.Ft.

17. Certain other averments have been made regarding the 10 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 merits of the case of the petitioner and allotment of patta in favour of the father of the petitioner. We will refer to such averments later on. At this time, we wish to make reference of averments made in the counter affidavit filed by the Lucknow Development Authority.

18. Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Lucknow Development Authority has pointed out from paragraph 12 of the counter affidavit saying that it had been alleged by Late Kaushal Kishore Shukla in his Writ Petition No.8426 (MB) of 2009 that the land on which he was allotted a housing site was Khasra No.88 belonging to Gram Sabha, Khargapur Husariya. However, when the Lucknow Development Authority had got superimposition done of the village revenue map with the lay out map of Vineet Khand-I, it was found that Plot No.1/205 is falling over Khasra No.55, Village Khargapur, Husariya, Lucknow and not over Khasra No.88. The house of the petitioner's father was constructed over Khasra No.55 and not over Khasra No.88, whereas Khasra No.55 belonged to private persons, which plot had been acquired and the compensation was paid and the possession was taken in 1986 itself. The Award was also delivered on 25.02.1987 after concluding the proceedings under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

19. Counsel for the Lucknow Development Authority has pointed out Annexure-CA-6 of his counter affidavit, which is a report of the joint team of the revenue officials and the officials of the Lucknow Development Authority along with a private company namely M/s P.C.S. Management Consultancy Private Limited, which was engaged to find out the location of Plot No.88 and Plot No.55 of Village Khargapur, Husariya, Lucknow . Earlier also measurement and demarcation was tried to be carried out, but the same could not be carried out because of difficulty in determining fixed points, therefore, M/s P.C.S. Management Consultancy Private Limited team was engaged. 11 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 They along with revenue team and the team of the Lucknow Development Authority officials had resorted Electronic Total Station (ETS) survey, which is a computerized survey and Khasra No.232, area 0.013 hectare recorded as Nala was taken as a fixed point. Such Nala was later on converted into a road when the Gomti Nagar Vineet Khand-I Scheme was developed. From this road/Nala/Khasra No.232, the location of Khasra No.55 and Khasra No.88 was found. The house of the petitioner's father was found to be situated at Plot No.55 and not on Plot No.88 and Plot No.55 admeasuring 0.6100 hectares had already been acquired in the land acquisition proceedings and compensation was paid to the recorded tenure holders, Ram Prasad, Santosh Kumar and others.

20. Put up tomorrow. September 16, 2025 Rao/- (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.)

: Anurag Narain Srivastava, Anshuman Singh, Ashok Kumar Singh, Shailendra Kumar Misra : Ratnesh Chandra, Amit Kumar Singh, Ashish Kumar, Namit Sharma, Sameer Kumar Upadhyay, Sharad Pathak Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

1. Heard Sri Anshuman Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ratnesh Chandra, who appears on behalf of opposite parties no.1 and 2, Sri Namit Sharma, who appears on behalf of opposite party no.3 and Sri Sharad Pathak, who appears on behalf of opposite party no.4.

2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "1. A writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 30.04.2024 passed by respondent no.2 in relation to Plot No.1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow contained as Annexure No.1 to this writ petition. II) A writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents directing them not to a lot Plot No.1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow belonging to the petitioner to anyone.”

3. It is the case of the petitioner as set up in the writ petition that his father Kaushal Kishore Shukla had earlier filed Writ Petition No.8426 (MB) of 2009 in relation to House No.A-1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow challenging the order dated 12.08.2009 passed by the Lucknow Development Authority. The 2 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 said writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution on 07.03.2024. Father of the petitioner has filed a recall application on 11.03.2024, which is pending for consideration, in which counsel for opposite party no.4 got an adjournment on 26.04 .2024. It is also stated that Writ Petition No.1970 (MB) of 2001 was filed by the father of opposite party no.4, Sri V.D. Keshari against the Lucknow Development Authority and this writ petition was clubbed with Writ Petition No.8426 (MB) of 2009 and was decided by this Court vide order dated 07.03.2024 directing the Lucknow Development Authority to consider the representation of the petitioner-V.D. Keshari.

4. It is also the case of the petitioner that his father was an ex- Army person and one plot of land in Gram Sabha, Khargapur, Husariya measuring 8 Biswa was given to him by the 2 pattas executed on 21.12.1973 and 02.09.1981. The plot in question i.e. 1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar has been developed after the Lucknow Development Authority has taken over the Gram Sabha land of Village Khargapur, Husariya. It has been stated that petitioner's father Late Kaushal Kishore Shukla constructed a house for his family, which was numbered as House No.54 of Village Husariya and the name of the family members of Late Kaushal Kishore Shukla were shown in Pariwar Register of Gram Sabha Khargapur, Husariya. The Gram Sabha had passed a resolution in favour of Late Kaushal Kishore Shukla as he being Hawaldar in Indian Army fought Indo-Pakistan War in the year 1971 and had received a special service medal with clasp while serving in Indian Peace Keeping Force at Srilanka. It has been stated in the writ petition that the house constructed by the father of the petitioner was assessed by the Nagar Mahapalika in the year 1992 and the Nagar Nigam issued House Number as 1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar to the father of the petitioner. The Nagar Nigam is collecting the house tax from the father of the petitioner since 2002. The Gomti Nagar Scheme was handed over to the Nagar Nigam by the Lucknow Development Authority in the year 2007. 3 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024

5. It is stated in the writ petition that under Section 198(4) of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act only the Collector is empowered to cancel the patta if any irregularities found thereon and such patta can be cancelled after issuing a show cause notice and the limitation for cancellation of such patta is five years. However, no such show cause notice was ever issued by the Collector to the father of the petitioner since the inception of pattas dated 21.12.1973 and 02.09.1981. It has further been stated that the requirement of approval of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was added only in the year 1975 and before 1975, the prior approval for grant of patta was not required. The Lucknow Development Authority has got no statutory authority to cancel or ignore the pattas granted by the Gram Sabha in violation of Section 198(4), (5) and (6) of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. It has also been stated that although the petitioner has been threatened to be thrown out from his plot while the other similarly situated nine persons/patta holders were adjusted by providing them the housing sites over their patta land.

6. It has also been stated that the petitioner and his family has been in continuous possession over Plot No.1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar for the past 51 years and his father had constructed the house over the said plot of land of Khasra No.88 of Village Khargapur, Husariya. Further submission has been made that V.D. Keshari, father of opposite party no.4 had applied for LIG house in Tikait Rai Housing Scheme of Lucknow Development Authority, but surprisingly his allotment was shifted to Gomti Nagar Scheme against the rules and he was given 5.810 Sq. Ft. of land in the posh area of Gomti Nagar and besides this, his wife Smt. Kamla Keshari was also allotted Plot No.A-3/272, Vishwas Khand. Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. It is stated that both the spouses cannot be allotted house or plot in the same city by the Lucknow Development Authority as it is against the Rules.

7. It has also been stated that a resolution was passed by the 4 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 Lucknow Development Authority in its Board meeting on 27.11.1998 that patta holders of earlier Gram Sabha land would be adjusted against their plots after taking the development charges. The Lucknow Development Authority has taken over such land without payment of compensation, but this resolution was never acted upon in relation to the petitioner. However, other patta holders were adjusted. It has also been stated that one query was made by the father of the petitioner from the Lucknow Development Authority with regard illegal allotment to the father of opposite party no.4, but it has been informed that application of V.D. Keshari is undated and was accepted sometimes in 1988, whereas Vineet Khand allotment had been started only in the year 1989. It is not clear as to how in the year 1988 A Type plot of 5810 Sq. Ft. was allotted to V.D. Keshari. It has also been stated in the writ petition that House No.1/205, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar is not situated over Khasra No.88, but it is situated over Khasra No.55, whereas no survey was done to find out on which Khasra plot number House No.1/205 Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar is situated. The Public Information Officer and the report of the Lucknow Development Authority submitted before the Grievance Committee of Vidhan Sabha has been filed as Annexure-21 to the writ petition.

8. Initially, when the writ petition was filed, counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Lucknow Development Authority were heard and notices were issued to opposite party no.4 and the Court had observed that till the next date of listing the petitioner shall not evicted from the house and no demolition of the house shall be carried out. The petitioner was also restrained from raising any new construction or creating any third party rights on the plot in dispute. Later on, an application for recall of that order was filed by the counsel for opposite party no.4, namely, C.M. Application No.2 of 2024, wherein it was stated that in pursuance of allotment made by the Lucknow Development Authority, the entire consideration was deposited in the year 1999. The Court after going through the affidavit 5 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 filed in support of the application for recall, modified its order dated 07.05.2024 to the extent that house of the father of petitioner, which is constructed only upon 645 Sq. Ft. of land and the appurtenant land thereto admeasuring only 2 Biswa as alleged to have been granted by way of patta by the Gram Sabha concerned, shall not be disturbed. The rest of the land, which is in dispute, was directed to be demarcated and handed over to the allottees, who have already paid the entire sale consideration to the Lucknow Development Authority. The Court also directed the listing of the writ petition along with the record of Writ Petition No.8426 (MB) of 2009, Kaushal Kishore Shukla Vs. Lucknow Development Authority and others, and Writ Petition No.1970 (MB) of 2001, V.D. Keshari Vs. Lucknow Development Authority and others, and 1701 (MB) of 1998, Kaushal Kishore Shukla Vs. Lucknow Development Authority and others, decided on 11.06.1998.

9. Today, all the writ petitions are listed and the record has been sent by the office. Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for adjournment, however, counsel for the Lucknow Development Authority and counsel for opposite party no.4 have vehemently opposed the prayer for adjournment on the ground that they have filed counter affidavits indicating the misrepresentation and concealment of material facts by the petitioner.

10. Counsel for opposite party no.4 has referred to counter affidavit filed by him on 28.09.2024, wherein it has been stated that the petitioner has not given reference of earlier writ petition filed by him and also the Original Suit No.233 of 1995 filed by the petitioner's father against the Lucknow Development Authority, in which interim injunction application was rejected by the court of Munsif Hawali, Lucknow on 21.03.1998. A copy of the plaint filed in Original Suit No.233 of 1995 as well as the orders passed on 25.04.1995 and 31.03.1998 have been filed as Annexures to the counter affidavit. A true copy of the Writ Petition No.1701 (MB) of 1998 has also been filed as Annexure 6 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 to the counter affidavit along with a copy of the order dated 21.03.1998 passed in the aforesaid writ petition.

11. Counsel for opposite party no.4 by pointing out the plaint of Regular Suit No.233 of 1995, which has been filed as Annexure to the counter affidavit, and has stated that in paragraph-1 of such plaint, the petitioner’s father had stated that Khasra No.88 Min. admeasuring 8 Biswa in Village Khargapur Husariya was allotted to him in 1973 by the Gram Sabha Khargapur Husariya as housing patta and the plaintiff-Kaushal Kishore Shukla was given the possession in 1973 by the Gram Panchayat and he built his house in 1980 over the said housing site. A boundary wall was also constructed. The plaintiff-Kaushal Kishore Shukla had planted 40 Eucalyptus Trees, 8 Mango Trees, 3 Guava Trees, 10 Poplar Trees and 10 other trees in the open land surrounding his house. On the northern side of the plot, the boundaries mentioned as sadak sarkari. An allegation was made against the defendant-Lucknow Development Authority that they had tried to interfere in the possession of the plaintiff on various dates and an attempt was made to demolish the house and the boundary wall. The disputed house/property was situated in Khasra No.88. Further, it has been pointed out from the writ petition that was filed earlier by the petitioner's father in 1998, a copy of which has been filed as annexure to the counter affidavit, that in the said writ petition, father of the petitioner had stated that the respondents are threatening to demolish House No.3, Village Husariya, Post Office Maleseman, Lucknow, now also known as Vineet Khand-I, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow and that the petitioner has constructed a house on the plot of land on 02.09.1981. The entire plot was measuring 6 Biswa after getting permission and patta from the Gram Sabha Khargapur, Husariya, Lucknow. The then Pradhan of the Gram Sabha had given patta on 02.09.1981. There is no mention in the said writ petition of alleged earlier patta granted in 1973 and 2 Bigha land for housing purposes in the said writ petition. The said writ petition was disposed of on the first day itself by this 7 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 Court by observing that counsel for the Lucknow Development Authority has stated that the Lucknow Development Authority would act only in accordance with law.

12. It has been submitted that the later writ petition that was filed i.e. Writ Petiton 20. Put up tomorrow. 20. Put up tomorrow. 8426 (MB) of 2009 praying for a writ in the 20. Put up tomorrow. nature of Certiorari quashing Annexure-1, which is a letter dated 12.08.2009 issued by the Under Secretary, Lucknow Development Authority indicating that the earlier letters which have been issued on 12.11.2008 and the reply given by the father of the petitioner on 13.11.2008, wherein he has stated that Plot No.A-1/205 Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar may be taken from him and it its place, father of the petitioner may be adjusted by giving a plot to him in Gomti Nagar Vistar Yojana @ current rate of 112.50 Sq. Mtr., but the father of the petitioner was not given any consent for such adjustment. Father of the petitioner was informed that registry has to be made in favour of the allottee of plot in Gomti Nagar Vistar Yojana @ 11 2.50 Sq. Mtr. In case no such consent is given, then demolition of the petitioner's encroachment would be done. Further prayer was made for issuance of a Mandamus to regularize the occupancy of House No.1-205 Vineet Khand in favour of the father of the petitioner after taking requisite development charges and a prayer was further made for quashing the allotment order made in favour of opposite party no.2 i.e. father of opposite party no.4-V.D. Keshari.

13. In the said writ petition, no order was passed when it was taken up as fresh on 31.08.2009 because of the reported illness of Sri D.R. Singh, counsel for the petitioner. In fact, in the said writ petition, no interim order was granted and the Court noted in its order dated 08.01.2020 that since from the last several dates, the case was being adjourned on the non-availability of counsel for the petitioner, as such, the case would not be adjourned on the next date. However, the matter was adjourned 8 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 again on the request of counsel for the petitioner and thereafter amendment application was filed for substituting the legal heirs of the deceased petitioner. The substitution application was allowed and the impleadment of opposite party no.2 was also allowed. The matter came to be dismissed for want of prosecution on 07.03.20204. Since Writ Petition No.8426 (MB)of 2009 was listed along with writ petition filed by V.D. Keshari, namely, Writ Petition No.1970 (MB) of 2001, while the writ petition filed by the petitioner's father was dismissed for want of prosecution, writ petition filed by the father of opposite party no.4 was also disposed of with the observation that in case a representation is moved by V.D. Keshari to the Vice- Chairman/Secretary, Lucknow Development Authority raising his grievance and annexing therewith all the documents in support of his claim, the same shall be considered and take a decision in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks from the date of a certified copy of the order dated 07.03.2024 was produced before him.

14. Writ Petition No.1970 (MB) of 2001 filed by the father of opposite party no.4 was only for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding opposite parties to perform its legal obligations by executing and registering the deed of conveyance in respect of Plot No.A-1/205, Vineet Khand and to deliver its vacant possession to the petitioner after removal of entrancement thereon.

15. Counsel for opposite party no.4 while arguing the matter on merits has submitted further that the petitioner in his writ petiti on has stated that the house was constructed by his father on Khasra No.88. However, a survey was done by a joint team of revenue officials and the officials of the Lucknow Development Authority and it was found that house of the father of the petitioner had actually been constructed over Khasra No.55, which land had already been acquired by notification issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the U.P. Land Acquisition Act and the 9 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 compensation has been paid to the recorded tenure holders. It has also been stated that petitioner concealed the report of the Consolidation Officer dated 27.04.2024, wherein it is apparent that the land upon which the petitioner’s father had constructed the house was on Khasra No.55 and not on Khasra No.88. Actually, major portion of Khasra No.88 is lying vacant, upon which illegal encroachments have been made by some other villagers. It has been argued that it appears that when the colony was developed, the petitioner moved towards the main road by leaving the land, on which he was claiming to be allotted a housing patta. It has also been submitted that patta that has been relied upon to have been issued in favour of Kaushal Kishore Shukla, is apparently not a genuine housing allotment as the father of the petitioner was working as Hawaldar and was not Below Poverty Line and he belongs to general category, therefore, he was not falling within any of the category as provided under Section 198(F) of the UPZA & LR Act.

16. It has also been submitted that petitioner's father had claimed that patta had been given to him by the Gram Sabha on 15 .12.1973 for 2 Biswa of land and then again in 1981 for 6 Biswa of land i.e. total 8 Biswa land is alleged to have been allotted to the petitioner's father. The 1981 patta is apparently in violation of the amended provisions of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, which requires prior permission of the Assistant Collector or in-charge of such division for grant of patta and by that time father of the petitioner was not landless and not Below Poverty Line. It has also been stated that presently petitioners are in possession almost 7000 Sq.Ft. of land and it is situated in the main road in front of Jaipuria School and the construction of the petitioners only 645.50 Sq.Ft., whereas the major part is of Tin Shade. On the other hand, father of opposite party no.4 was a retired judicial officer and he was allotted 540 Sq. Mtrs. Land, which comes to about 5810 Sq.Ft.

17. Certain other averments have been made regarding the 10 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 merits of the case of the petitioner and allotment of patta in favour of the father of the petitioner. We will refer to such averments later on. At this time, we wish to make reference of averments made in the counter affidavit filed by the Lucknow Development Authority.

18. Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Lucknow Development Authority has pointed out from paragraph 12 of the counter affidavit saying that it had been alleged by Late Kaushal Kishore Shukla in his Writ Petition No.8426 (MB) of 2009 that the land on which he was allotted a housing site was Khasra No.88 belonging to Gram Sabha, Khargapur Husariya. However, when the Lucknow Development Authority had got superimposition done of the village revenue map with the lay out map of Vineet Khand-I, it was found that Plot No.1/205 is falling over Khasra No.55, Village Khargapur, Husariya, Lucknow and not over Khasra No.88. The house of the petitioner's father was constructed over Khasra No.55 and not over Khasra No.88, whereas Khasra No.55 belonged to private persons, which plot had been acquired and the compensation was paid and the possession was taken in 1986 itself. The Award was also delivered on 25.02.1987 after concluding the proceedings under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

19. Counsel for the Lucknow Development Authority has pointed out Annexure-CA-6 of his counter affidavit, which is a report of the joint team of the revenue officials and the officials of the Lucknow Development Authority along with a private company namely M/s P.C.S. Management Consultancy Private Limited, which was engaged to find out the location of Plot No.88 and Plot No.55 of Village Khargapur, Husariya, Lucknow . Earlier also measurement and demarcation was tried to be carried out, but the same could not be carried out because of difficulty in determining fixed points, therefore, M/s P.C.S. Management Consultancy Private Limited team was engaged. 11 WRIC No. 4177 of 2024 They along with revenue team and the team of the Lucknow Development Authority officials had resorted Electronic Total Station (ETS) survey, which is a computerized survey and Khasra No.232, area 0.013 hectare recorded as Nala was taken as a fixed point. Such Nala was later on converted into a road when the Gomti Nagar Vineet Khand-I Scheme was developed. From this road/Nala/Khasra No.232, the location of Khasra No.55 and Khasra No.88 was found. The house of the petitioner's father was found to be situated at Plot No.55 and not on Plot No.88 and Plot No.55 admeasuring 0.6100 hectares had already been acquired in the land acquisition proceedings and compensation was paid to the recorded tenure holders, Ram Prasad, Santosh Kumar and others.

20. Put up tomorrow. September 16, 2025 Rao/- (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.)