MANISHA MANDIR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) The question for our consideration on the facts and circumstances of this case, is as to whether the petitioner's request for allotment of the said land ought to have been considered and if so, at what point of time.

(3.) In our opinion, considering the nature of the land and the facts of the present case, the land should be allotted to the petitioner, which otherwise could not be used for any other purpose. The excess land formed part of the same plot. It cannot be exploited by the respondents or given for any other purpose to any other person. It ordinarily ought to have been part of the original plot allotted to the petitioner. It appears that on account of some mistake that part of the land was not allotted. The petitioner realizing this had immediately applied for the said additional land.