UMA SHANKAR DIXIT Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner claims to be a tenant of the accommodation. He got an allotment order under the provisions of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (Act No. XIII of 1972) on 25-8-1976. In respect of this property proceedings for acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act had commenced by a notification under S. 4 of the Act in 1965. Final notification was issued in 1968 under S. 6 of the Act. THE acquisition was for a company. THE petitioner by a letter addressed to the Chief Minister of the State dated 29th Sept. 1976 requested that the property be released from acquisition, and also prayed for the stay of the acquisition proceedings. THE award was given by the Collector on 4-8-1977. THE present petition has now been filed.

(2.) THE petitioner has challenged the acquisition proceedings and has further alleged that even if the proceedings be there, he cannot be ejected under S. 16 of the Land Acquisition Act.

(3.) LEARNED counsel has urged that because the award has not been given either against or in favour of the petitioner he cannot be evicted. The contention is that possession cannot be taken from the petitioner because his claim was not considered by the Collector while giving the award. The petitioner had never filed any objection or claim before the Land Acquisition Officer for a share in the compensation. He had come into the picture much after notification under S. 9 of the Act had been issued. Even if it be that the Collector could suo motu take into consideration the petitioners claim in the compensation, that case gives him only a right, to ask for a reference to the District Judge and not a right to resist the eviction from the property under S. 16 of the Act. It is the making of the award that gives to the Collector jurisdiction to take possession. Merely a claim to apportionment in the compensation awarded cannot oust his jurisdiction to act under S. 16.