TAPESA Vs. TAHSILDAR BANSDIH BALLIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M. Katju, J. This writ petition had been admitted on 5-8-1983 and notice was issued to the respondents. The petition was filed after serving notice on the learned standing counsel who represented the respondents. Since then a long period has expired but no counter-affidavit was filed by the respondents and hence we are disposing of this writ petition finally treating the allegations in the petition to be correct.

(2.) THE petitioners claim to be tenure-holders of plot Nos. 488, 489, 222, 460, 509, 459 and 200 situate in village Dhir Chhapra and plot Nos. 279 and 271 situate in village Bhoj Chhapra, Pargana Kharid, Tahsil Bansdih, district Ballia. For constructing a Bundh the irrigation authorities had requisitioned a lot of land of the two villages. THE petitioners received under Section 3/8 of the U. P. Rural Development (Requisitioning of Land) Act, 1948 by which they were directed to hand over possession of the said plots within one week. True copies of the notice are Annexures 1-A, 1-B and 1-C to the writ petition. In these notices it is stated that the aforesaid land is required for making constructions and the petitioners were directed to hand over possession within a week on receipt of the notices. THE notices also mentioned that they can give written objections within three day's.

(3.) A perusal of the said definition shows that the construction of Bundh is not a public purpose within the meaning of the Act. Hence, in our opinion the notice were wholly without jurisdiction and consequently the said notice (Annexures 1-A, 1-B and 1-C to the petition) were hereby quashed. The petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. Petition allowed. SANJAY .