SURAJ DEO Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ELEVEN petitioners approached this court alleging that they were Bhumidhars of plot Nos. 565, 566, 567 and 568 of village Koal Kalan, Tahsil Bansdih, District Ballia, which was being allotted for constrcution of houses to residents of another village illegally and without any intimation to them. According to them these plots were their only source of livelihood. On these allegations petition was admitted and interim order was also granted. A supplementary affidavit was later on filed alleging that land was being acquired for Thakurs and Brahmins which was contrary to law. Copy of order dated 26th May, 1976 was also filed. In counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite parties it was averred that no land of petitioners No. 6 to 11 was being requisitioned. But some portion of plot numbers 566 and 567 were requisitioned to settle residents of Chandpur as their houses had been washed away due to action of river Ghaghra. It was also averred that plot No. 565 and 568 were not requisitioned. Details of area requisitioned and total area held by each petitioner was mentioned in paragraph 5 (a) It indicated that nominal area was requisitioned under U. P. Requisition of Property (Flood Relief) Act, 1948. Consequently, interim order was vacated on 10th December, 1976. In supplementary counter affidavit it is stated that each petitioner was served personally. In rejoinder and supplementary rejoinder affidavit these allegations have not been specifically denied.

(2.) FROM what has been narrated above it is apparent that opposite parties requisitioned portions of two plots in accordance with law. Even if there would have been some illegality or irregularity the objective being to settle persons whose houses had been washed away due to natural calamity and the area acquired of each petitioner being nominal it is not a fit case for exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction. Further, petitioners did not disclose correct facts in their petition.