(1.) By means of Recall Application Nos. 7298 of 2010 and 7303 of 2010, the respondent nos. 1 and 2 have prayed to recall the order dated 6-8-2010 whereby they were directed to show cause as to why they should not be punished for committing contempt of this Court"s order dated 4-6-2010. On behalf of the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 delay condonation application accompanied by counter affidavit has been filed. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the above applications. Grounds are sufficient to condone the delay in filing the counter affidavit. Accordingly, delay in filing the counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 3 is condoned. The counter affidavit is taken on record. Since the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 3 has been taken on record, there is no need to proceed further in contempt matter against the respondent nos. 1 and
(2.) The recall applications filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2 stand disposed of accordingly. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought the following relief:-
(3.) So far as the relief (a) whereby quashing of Notification dated 5-10-2009 has been sought by the petitioners, admittedly the period of the impugned Notification has elapsed on 31-5-2010, but the prayer (b) sought by the petitioners survives. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present writ petition, according to the petitioners, are that the petitioners are Bhumidhars with transferable rights of the land of plot no. 279/1 of Mauza Rishikesh, Pargana Parwadoon, district Dehradun, but the State Government had temporarily acquired the said land for Kumbh Mela purposes showing it plot no. 279/12. The averment to this effect has been made in paragraph no. 25 of the writ petition. In the counter affidavit, the stand taken by the respondent-State is that the land of Khasra No. 279/12 was acquired for purposes of Kumbh Mela-2010 under Section 35 of the Land Acquisition Act and that the land belonging to the petitioners was not acquired. It is also stated that the disputed land belongs to the State Government and is recorded in the name of the State Government, therefore, there is no question of awarding compensation to the petitioners or anyone else. It is also stated that the petitioners no. 1 and 2 are the owners of Khasra No. 279/1, which has not been interfered with, while the land of plot no. 279/12 alone was acquired. And that the petitioners have no concern with the land acquired by the State Government.