KALICHARAN Vs. STATE OF U.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS modification application has been filed on behalf of the Ghaziabad Development Authority to modify the judgement and order dated 13th January, 2012 delivered in the aforesaid writ petition as well as other connected writ petitions. By inserting the portions as marked in the photostat copy of the judgement dated 13th January, 2012 in the red ink, learned Counsel appearing for the applicant has prayed for modifications accordingly, to which there is no objection on behalf of other side.

(2.) THE Court has considered the submissions of the parties and found that if the judgement, which has been originally passed on 13th January, 2012, is modified as submitted by the parties, the same will not alter the ultimate result of the matter. Therefore, the modification application deserves to be allowed and is allowed, however, without imposing any cost. However, since the modification required to be made in the original judgement and order dated 13th January, 2012 is in the shape of insertion in the judgement, the judgement dated 13th January, 2012 is modified accordingly and the modified judgement is as follows:

(3.) THE above direction had to be given because that was a case where Section 17(4) of the Act was invoked and enquiry under Section 5 -A of the Act had been dispensed with. As we have already observed, the petitioner's concern and rightly so, is for adequate compensation to be awarded, and disbursed at the earliest, we direct that the above observation, made in Rajendra and others (supra) may be read as in the context of enquiry under Sections 9 and 11 of the Act. The respondent is directed to take steps forthwith and to ensure that award is given and compensation is disbursed in accordance with law. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of, however, without imposing any cost."