High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 42 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11467 of 2010 Petitioner :- Om Prakash Jain Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. P.S. Avas Evam Shahri Niyojan And Anr. Counsel for Petitioner :- G.K. Singh,V.K. Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dsm Triptahi,D. S. M. Tripathi Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J. Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Shri Viswajeet Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by 1. Shri Sankalp Narayan and Shri Pankaj Singh, learned counsels appearing for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri H.R. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Kamlesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the intervenor. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the 2. order dated 21 November, 2009, passed by the second respondent-District Magistrate, Gorakhpur, wherein, the application dated 1 July, 1997, for converting nazul land to freehold was kept in abeyance for want of instructions from the State Government. The facts giving rise to the instant writ petition is that plot No. 82, 3. admeasuring two acres, was granted on lease to one Shri Purshottam Das Raiees, for a period of thirty years, w.e.f. 7 June, 1938. After expiry of lease, the second respondent granted approval for renewal of lease, w.e.f. 7 June, 1989, until 9 September, 1998. The rent of the tenancy/lagan was raised fifty percent from Rs. 14 to Rs. 43 per year. 4. The State Government vide order dated 30 July, 1984, granted renewal of the lease in favour of Shri Purshottam Das Raiees for a further period of thirty years, w.e.f. 7 June, 1968. 5. Thereafter, Government issued a Government Order dated 17 February, 1996, formulating a Scheme for conversion of lease hold rights into free hold rights. 6. The aforenoted Government Order came to be modified from time to time and finally the State Government vide Government Order dated 29 August 1996, provided that the lessee of the leased plot could nominate a person in his favour. The free hold rights could be granted as per the prevalent rates in accordance with the earlier Government Order dated 17 February, 1996. After the original lessee Shri Purshottam Das Raiees died, he was succeeded by his four sons, namely, Shri Brij Raman Das, Shri Rewti Raman Das, Shri Indra Raman Das and Shri Ratnesh Raman das. 7. The legal heirs of Shri Purshottam Das Raiees nominated petitioner in terms of the aforenoted Government Order upon receiving a consideration at Rs. 35,54, 904/- and also gave an affidavit dated 12 August 1997, to that effect authorizing the petitioners herein to obtain free hold rights in their favour in view of the nomination. It appears that the State Government vide communication dated 27 8. October 1997, addressed to the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur, approved the conversion of the nazul plot No. 82, in favour of the petitioner/nominee of the erstwhile lease holder. 9. Pursuant thereof, petitioner deposited 25 percent of the cost of the aforesaid plot along with the nomination fee in the Government Treasury on 30 June, 1999.
Decision
It appears, thereafter, the tenant on the property whom the learned 10. counsel for the intervenor represents, filed a writ being writ petition No. 4170 of 1999, before this Court. This Court, vide interim order dated 1 February 1999, stayed the effect and operation of the Government Order dated 1 December 1998, insofar as, it related to the writ petitioner. Finally, the writ petition of the tenants came to be dismissed on merit by this Court on 22 August, 1987. 11. Aggrieved, the matter was carried before the Supreme Court, the Special Leave Petition came to be dismissed on 28 April, 2008. In other words, the claim of the intervenors (tenants) on the said property came to be rejected. Insofar as, their claim for conversion of the nazul plot from lease hold to free hold in respect of their tenancy stands concluded. 12. After dismissal of the Special Leave Petition, petitioner again moved an application on 15 December, 2008, before the second respondent making request to expedite the pending matter and to convert the nazul plot No. 82 to free hold. 13. The District Magistrate, Gorakhpur, did not take a decision. Aggrieved, petitioner approached this Court by filing a writ being Writ Petition No. 4976 of 2009, which came to be disposed of vide order dated 31 August, 2009, with a direction to the second respondent/District Magistrate, Gorakhpur, to pass an appropriate order on the pending application of the petitioner for conversion of the nazul plot to free hold. 2 of 3 Pursuant to the aforenoted order, the impugned order came to be 14. passed by the second respondent, wherein, no decision was taken on the application of the petitioner, rather, the matter was kept in abeyance pending decision/clarification from the State Government. 15. In the meantime, the State Government vide communication dated 14 January, 2010, directed the second respondent-District Magistrate, Gorakhpur, to convert the plot No. 82, to free hold. In view of the admitted facts, inter se, parties, it is not in dispute 16. that the second respondent till date has neither complied the order of this Court nor the direction of the State Government. The learned Standing Counsel, on being confronted with the 17. aforenoted facts, submits that the second respondent-District Magistrate, Gorakhpur, has already disposed off the pending application of the petitioner by passing an order dated 16 March, 2015, which has been challenged by the petitioners in a petition being Writ C No. 5764 of 2015, pending before the Lucknow Bench of this Court. This fact is not being disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. In view thereof, the cause of action in the present writ petition no 18. longer survives, hence, the writ petition has rendered infructuous. 19. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed, on having rendered infructuous with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the pending writ petition before the Lucknow Bench of this Court on its logical conclusion. 20. No cost. Order Date :- 17.3.2023 Mukesh Pal Digitally signed by :- MUKESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad 3 of 3