SHIV NARAIN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the writ petitions, as numbered above, are taken by this Court as bunch cases to hear out and decide by common order.

(2.) UPON hearing learned Counsel appearing for the parties, we have come to know that the dispute is with regard to notification issued by the Kanpur Development Authority (hereinafter referred as K.D.A.) for acquiring the land of the petitioners following the notifications originally issued by the State under Section 117 of the U.P. Jamindari Abolition And Land Reforms Act, 1950. According to them, by the notification of the State, the lands can be acquired to be given to Gaon Sabhas and local authorities. According to the petitioners, they are either tenure holders or purchasers from the tenure holders, therefore, the acquisition, if any, by K.D.A. cannot be made in respect of such land holders in view of exception under the Act.

(3.) WE have carefully gone through the guidelines as given in the aforesaid case reference. According to us, so long on the notification exists the F.I.R., if any, as allegedly lodged by the K.D.A will exist. We cannot put the curt before the horse by saying that F.I.R. will be quashed but notification will exist. We have no jurisdiction to determine their right in criminal writ jurisdiction. It has to be declared by civil court or by a court having civil writ jurisdiction. It is well known that civil court's judgement and order will have binding upon the criminal court. If the petitioners succeed therein automatically the face value of the F.I.R. will evaporate otherwise the F.I.R. will exist.