BINU SINHA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioners Shri Adnan Ahmad and Mr. Ashok Kumar Pandey, learned Counsel for the State.

(2.) THE usual action of the State in using the land of the petitioners without taking recourse to the acquisition proceedings and not paying the compensation is an issue which has again come up before us. Though despite our orders passed in various writ petitions that such an action of the State not only is adverse to the interest of the land holders but also burdens the State with the liability of increasing interest and thereby causing loss to the public exchequer and therefore, the State may look into all such cases and take appropriate decision with liberty given to it to recover the amount of interest from the officers who are responsible for such acts and particularly for non-payment of compensation for such a long time, but despite the aforesaid directions, it appears that the State has not taken any step in this direction.

(3.) IT is undisputed hat the petitioners' land was used for making Ambedkar Park in the year 1979 but they were not paid any compensation nor their land was acquired nor requisitioned.