Others v. State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Urban Development Deptt. Lko. And

1. Heard Ms. Alka Verma, learned counsel for the petitioners, who are three in number, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for the U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Praishad, respondent nos.2 and 3.

2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "a. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing of the demolition order dated 23.08.2025 as contained in Annexure No.1. b. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to distrub the peaceful possession of the petitioners on the land in question. c. Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to give compensation in accordance with law."

3. In view of the order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to respondent nos.4 and 5 is dispensed with.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad (hereinafter referred to as 'the Parishad') had issued a Notification under Section 28 of the Act of 1965 for Kursi Road Extension Scheme on

30.7.1983 in respect of Khasra no.320, ad-measuring 1-18-1. Thereafter, 2 WRIC No. 9244 of 2025 Notification under Section 32 of the Act of 1965 was issued on 12.2.1987, followed by the Notification under Section 17 of the Act of 1965 on

9.6.1987. Subsequently, possession of the said land was taken by the Special Land Acquisition Officer on 12.8.1992 only with respect to land ad- measuring 1-17-1 of Khasra no.320, but 1 Biswa land was left for the recorded tenure holder Fekka, who sold a portion of his land to several persons including the three petitioners herein. The erstwhile owner Fekka sold 400 square feet land on 26.7.1986 to Smt. Usha Bajpai, wife of Sri Dinesh Bajpai, from whom the petitioner no.1 has derived title. On

30.9.1990, 750 square feet of land of Khasra No.320 was sold to Smt. Shanti Dwivedi, wife of Sri Divendra Dwivedi, and on 1.12.2003, 1360 square feet of land out of Khasra nos.320 and 323 was sold to Smt. Veena Pal, wife of Sri Ram Prakash Pal, petitioner no.3 herein. The petitioners have constructed houses and are living there. After many years, demolition notices were issued to the petitioners and petitioner nos.1 and 2 being aggrieved filed Writ Petition No.8914 (MB) of 2007, which was disposed of. The petitioner no.3 also filed Writ Petition No.4781 (MB) of 2018, which was also disposed of. The Court had ordered an enquiry to be conducted by the competent authority of the Parishad. After orders were passed in these two writ petitions, the competent authority passed an order on 10.5.2018, proceeding on the assumption that compensation has already been paid to the father of respondent nos.4 and 5, Late Fekka, the erstwhile owner. In fact, Fekka, the erstwhile owner had given an affidavit before the Additional District Magistrate (Land Acquisition) where he had admitted that he had sold 1/3rd of the total land and he did not wish to get compensation for the land which he had already sold out.

5. It has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that the competent authority had passed an order on 15.6.2016 itself that where any land dispute is pending and remains unresolved for more than five years, the Parishad shall willfully settle the dispute by compensating at prevailing/current market rate of the disputed land, subject to a maximum extent of 500 square meters. It is the case of the petitioners that they had approached the concerned officials on several occasions, but no compensation was paid to them. Instead, they were advised to recover compensation from the father of respondent nos.4 and 5. 3 WRIC No. 9244 of 2025

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to Annexure-9 to the writ petition, which is a letter addressed to the Assistant Housing Commissioner (Land), from which it is evident that out of Khasra no.320, possession was taken of only 1 Bigha 17 Biswa and 1 Biswansi land as there was a dispute regarding ownership relating to 1 Biswa land. The respondents have not considered the petitioners' repeated representations and have instead passed the impugned demolition order. Hence this writ petition.

7. Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Parishad, on the basis of written instructions placed before this Court, has submitted that, as is evident from the pleadings on record, Section 28 Notification was issued on 30.7.1983 and petitioner no.1-Dinesh Kumar Bajpai's wife bought land of 400 square feet out of Khasra no.320 on 26.7.1986, and Section 32 Notification was issued on 12.2.1987 and petitioner no.2-Shanti Dwivedi bought land of 750 square feet of Khasra no.320 on 13.9.1990. The possession of land was taken on 12.8.1992 and 19.8.1993 by the Parishad and award was declared on 18.3.1998. The compensation was paid to Fekka, the erstwhile land owner. Thereafter, Fekka filed a Reference for enhancement of compensation, which was considered by the Presiding Officer of U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Tribunal. A copy of such Reference No.7/2004 and the order passed therein on 30.5.2017 is enclosed to the said instructions.

8. Learned counsel for the Parishad has read out the operative portion of the order passed in the said Reference, wherein mention has been made of Khasra Nos.320 and 323 situated at Village Batha Sabauli, Pargana, Tehsil and District Lucknow, which have been acquired and compensation of Rs.7/- per square feet was directed to be given.

9. We have gone through the Reference order and also to the Annexures in the writ petition and we find that Fekka had sold off 400 square feet land of Khasra no.320 initially to predecessor-in-interest of petitioner no.1 and thereafter he had sold off 750 square feet land to petitioner no.2 out of the same left over land of 1 Biswa of Khasra 320. In the third Sale Deed of

1.12.2003, Fekka had mentioned that he had sold off part of Khasra no.320 and also part of Khasra no.323. It is evident from the pleadings on record and also the enclosures that only the land ad-measuring 1-17-1 of Khasra 4 WRIC No. 9244 of 2025 no.320 was taken over by the Parishad and compensation for the same was paid to the erstwhile recorded tenure holder and 1 Biswa land was left and atleast two Sale Deeds, that have been mentioned i.e. Sale Deeds dated

26.7.1986 and 13.9.1990 were executed before the possession was taken in 1992-93 by the Parishad and award was declared in 1998 and the area mentioned is less than 1365 square feet, equivalent to 1 Biswa, which was sold by the erstwhile recorded tenure holder.

10. At this stage, Sri Ratnesh Chandra has pointed out that 1 Biswa land of Khasra no.320 was left out and not taken possession of, only because one Tube-well and one Kothri/Store Room/Hut was existing thereon and in the Sale Deed, there is no mention, either of Tube-well or Kothri on the land that has been sold out by the erstwhile recorded tenure holder to the petitioners.

11. Be that as it may, since learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon a decision of the Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.295 of 2022 dated 13.11.2024, to say that personal hearing should be given in the cases of demolition of residential houses, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent no.3-Competent Officer/Executive Engineer, Construction Division-10 of U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Nilgiri Complex, IIIrd Floor, Indira Nagar, Lucknow, which has been wrongly mentioned as Construction Division-13 in the writ petition, to give a personal hearing to the petitioners before actual demolition is undertaken of their residential houses. We direct the petitioners to approach the office of respondent no.3 on 06.10.2025 at 2:00 p.m. The petitioners shall be heard. They shall give their written submissions along with documentary evidence with regard to land, that was sold off by the father of respondent nos.4 and 5 to them, and after taking into account the submissions made by the petitioners, an appropriate reasoned and speaking order shall be passed by respondent no.3 within a period of three weeks thereafter.

12. For a period of five weeks or till a reasoned and speaking order is passed by respondent no.3, houses of the petitioners shall not be demolished. September 17, 2025 Sachin (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Ms. Alka Verma, learned counsel for the petitioners, who are three in number, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for the U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Praishad, respondent nos.2 and 3.

2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "a. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing of the demolition order dated 23.08.2025 as contained in Annexure No.1. b. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to distrub the peaceful possession of the petitioners on the land in question. c. Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to give compensation in accordance with law."

3. In view of the order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to respondent nos.4 and 5 is dispensed with.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad (hereinafter referred to as 'the Parishad') had issued a Notification under Section 28 of the Act of 1965 for Kursi Road Extension Scheme on

30.7.1983 in respect of Khasra no.320, ad-measuring 1-18-1. Thereafter, 2 WRIC No. 9244 of 2025 Notification under Section 32 of the Act of 1965 was issued on 12.2.1987, followed by the Notification under Section 17 of the Act of 1965 on

9.6.1987. Subsequently, possession of the said land was taken by the Special Land Acquisition Officer on 12.8.1992 only with respect to land ad- measuring 1-17-1 of Khasra no.320, but 1 Biswa land was left for the recorded tenure holder Fekka, who sold a portion of his land to several persons including the three petitioners herein. The erstwhile owner Fekka sold 400 square feet land on 26.7.1986 to Smt. Usha Bajpai, wife of Sri Dinesh Bajpai, from whom the petitioner no.1 has derived title. On

30.9.1990, 750 square feet of land of Khasra No.320 was sold to Smt. Shanti Dwivedi, wife of Sri Divendra Dwivedi, and on 1.12.2003, 1360 square feet of land out of Khasra nos.320 and 323 was sold to Smt. Veena Pal, wife of Sri Ram Prakash Pal, petitioner no.3 herein. The petitioners have constructed houses and are living there. After many years, demolition notices were issued to the petitioners and petitioner nos.1 and 2 being aggrieved filed Writ Petition No.8914 (MB) of 2007, which was disposed of. The petitioner no.3 also filed Writ Petition No.4781 (MB) of 2018, which was also disposed of. The Court had ordered an enquiry to be conducted by the competent authority of the Parishad. After orders were passed in these two writ petitions, the competent authority passed an order on 10.5.2018, proceeding on the assumption that compensation has already been paid to the father of respondent nos.4 and 5, Late Fekka, the erstwhile owner. In fact, Fekka, the erstwhile owner had given an affidavit before the Additional District Magistrate (Land Acquisition) where he had admitted that he had sold 1/3rd of the total land and he did not wish to get compensation for the land which he had already sold out.

5. It has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that the competent authority had passed an order on 15.6.2016 itself that where any land dispute is pending and remains unresolved for more than five years, the Parishad shall willfully settle the dispute by compensating at prevailing/current market rate of the disputed land, subject to a maximum extent of 500 square meters. It is the case of the petitioners that they had approached the concerned officials on several occasions, but no compensation was paid to them. Instead, they were advised to recover compensation from the father of respondent nos.4 and 5. 3 WRIC No. 9244 of 2025

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to Annexure-9 to the writ petition, which is a letter addressed to the Assistant Housing Commissioner (Land), from which it is evident that out of Khasra no.320, possession was taken of only 1 Bigha 17 Biswa and 1 Biswansi land as there was a dispute regarding ownership relating to 1 Biswa land. The respondents have not considered the petitioners' repeated representations and have instead passed the impugned demolition order. Hence this writ petition.

7. Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Parishad, on the basis of written instructions placed before this Court, has submitted that, as is evident from the pleadings on record, Section 28 Notification was issued on 30.7.1983 and petitioner no.1-Dinesh Kumar Bajpai's wife bought land of 400 square feet out of Khasra no.320 on 26.7.1986, and Section 32 Notification was issued on 12.2.1987 and petitioner no.2-Shanti Dwivedi bought land of 750 square feet of Khasra no.320 on 13.9.1990. The possession of land was taken on 12.8.1992 and 19.8.1993 by the Parishad and award was declared on 18.3.1998. The compensation was paid to Fekka, the erstwhile land owner. Thereafter, Fekka filed a Reference for enhancement of compensation, which was considered by the Presiding Officer of U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Tribunal. A copy of such Reference No.7/2004 and the order passed therein on 30.5.2017 is enclosed to the said instructions.

8. Learned counsel for the Parishad has read out the operative portion of the order passed in the said Reference, wherein mention has been made of Khasra Nos.320 and 323 situated at Village Batha Sabauli, Pargana, Tehsil and District Lucknow, which have been acquired and compensation of Rs.7/- per square feet was directed to be given.

9. We have gone through the Reference order and also to the Annexures in the writ petition and we find that Fekka had sold off 400 square feet land of Khasra no.320 initially to predecessor-in-interest of petitioner no.1 and thereafter he had sold off 750 square feet land to petitioner no.2 out of the same left over land of 1 Biswa of Khasra 320. In the third Sale Deed of

1.12.2003, Fekka had mentioned that he had sold off part of Khasra no.320 and also part of Khasra no.323. It is evident from the pleadings on record and also the enclosures that only the land ad-measuring 1-17-1 of Khasra 4 WRIC No. 9244 of 2025 no.320 was taken over by the Parishad and compensation for the same was paid to the erstwhile recorded tenure holder and 1 Biswa land was left and atleast two Sale Deeds, that have been mentioned i.e. Sale Deeds dated

26.7.1986 and 13.9.1990 were executed before the possession was taken in 1992-93 by the Parishad and award was declared in 1998 and the area mentioned is less than 1365 square feet, equivalent to 1 Biswa, which was sold by the erstwhile recorded tenure holder.

10. At this stage, Sri Ratnesh Chandra has pointed out that 1 Biswa land of Khasra no.320 was left out and not taken possession of, only because one Tube-well and one Kothri/Store Room/Hut was existing thereon and in the Sale Deed, there is no mention, either of Tube-well or Kothri on the land that has been sold out by the erstwhile recorded tenure holder to the petitioners.

11. Be that as it may, since learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon a decision of the Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.295 of 2022 dated 13.11.2024, to say that personal hearing should be given in the cases of demolition of residential houses, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent no.3-Competent Officer/Executive Engineer, Construction Division-10 of U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Nilgiri Complex, IIIrd Floor, Indira Nagar, Lucknow, which has been wrongly mentioned as Construction Division-13 in the writ petition, to give a personal hearing to the petitioners before actual demolition is undertaken of their residential houses. We direct the petitioners to approach the office of respondent no.3 on 06.10.2025 at 2:00 p.m. The petitioners shall be heard. They shall give their written submissions along with documentary evidence with regard to land, that was sold off by the father of respondent nos.4 and 5 to them, and after taking into account the submissions made by the petitioners, an appropriate reasoned and speaking order shall be passed by respondent no.3 within a period of three weeks thereafter.

12. For a period of five weeks or till a reasoned and speaking order is passed by respondent no.3, houses of the petitioners shall not be demolished. September 17, 2025 Sachin (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench