MISRI LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have raised grievance by this writ petition that despite the fact that House No. 106/262 (i) Jeevan Lal Ka Ahata, Gandhinagar, Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as disputed property), of which they are owners in possession, has not been validly declared as Slum area' under section 3 of U. P. Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the representatives of Kanpur Development Authority were compelling petitioners and their tenants to deposit down payment under the 'Higher Purchase Scheme' of said authority and to get lease-deed executed in respect of said property without acquiring the same. THE grievance arose as the Kanpur Development Authority was accepting down payment under 'Higher Purchase Scheme'. one such person being Ghaseete from whom payment was received without acquiring disputed property. THE petitioners also drew attention of respondent no. 3 Competent Authority but he simply gave assurance to the effect that petitioners need not worry as their houses were not in any acquisition proceedings As the Competent Authority did not take any action inspite of repeated written and oral requests while Kanpur Development Authority and the persons from whom down payments were accepted by Kanpur Development Authority, were interfering in possession of the petitioners over the said premises and they were also using force hence the present petition was filed on apprehension that petitioners will loose their property on account of high-handedness and malafide action of Kanpur Development Authority.

(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has contended that the declaration under Section 3 of the Act in respect of the property in dispute dated 29-3-1984 was wholly invalid as no opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioners before making such a declaration. The petitioners have further contended that in any case even if declaration under Section 3 of the Act was a valid declaration then too since no Notification has been issued under section 17 of the Act acquiring the land in dispute the petitioners continue to be the owners of the property in dispute and the respondent has no jurisdiction whatsoever to interfere with the possession of the property of the petitioners or with his properietory rights in respect of the property in dispute.

(3.) FOR the reasons assigned above, the writ petition is allowed and the declaration under section 3 of the Act dated 29-3-1984 in respect of house and land bearing Municipal No. 106/262 (i) Jeevan Lal Ka Ahata, Gandhi Nagar, Kanpur is quashed and the respondents, their officers and staff and all other persons claiming under them are restrained from interfering in petitioners ownership rights and possession over said property It is clarified that it is open to respondents to take action afresh in accordance with the Act and to declare disputed property as 'Slum area' and to acquire the land and the building, if it is considered necessary. There will be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.