DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/COLLECTOR Vs. HEERA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The impugned judgment, in our opinion, proceeds on the basis of contradictory stands taken by the district administration but does not deal with the factual issue in question.

(3.) As far as the conflicting stands taken by the district administration are concerned, it is stated that departmental proceedings have been initiated against the erring officer(s). Respondent No. 1, Heera Lal, was the owner of 8 biswa of land in Plot No. 606/2 situated in Village Sukrit, Pargana Ahraura, Tehsil Chunar, District Sonbhadra, Uttar Pradesh. He sold 4 biswa of land to one Mrs. Badrunisha and 1 biswa of land to Mrs. Gyan Devi. He was, therefore, left with 3 biswa of land. Respondent No. 1, Heera Lal, claims that the district administration took possession of 4 biswa of land for construction of a road but no compensation has been paid to him. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1, Heera Lal, has drawn our attention to the Site Inspection and Demarcation Report dtd. 15/11/2018 which records the facts, as noted above. In the end, the report states that the area of vacant land of Gata No. 606/2 on the side of Varanasi-Shaktinagar can be taken by Heera Lal. Respondent No. 1, Heera Lal, claims that he has not been given the possession of the said land in spite of the Site Inspection and Demarcation Report dtd. 15/11/2018. The appellants do not dispute that respondent No. 1, Heera Lal, is the owner of 3 biswa of land in Plot No. 606/2. Thus, the factual aspect that arises for consideration is as to whether the appellants are in possession of 3 biswa of land belonging and left with respondent No. 1, Heera Lal, and have constructed a road thereon. It is this aspect which has to be examined and decided by the High Court.