UNIVERSITY OF ALLAHABAD Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE ALLAHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated 18-11-1998. passed by Shri B.K Rathi, District Judge. Allahabad scrapping of issue No. 3 in a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") has given rise to the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in the following circumstances :

(2.) There is a property No 21/31 Moti Lal Nehru Road, revenue plot Nos 8 and 9, Allahabad, which is earmarked for residential purposes in the master plain The said land was held by one N D. Agarwal in his capacity as perpetual lessee with transferable rights. Uma Shankar Singh respondent No.3, who claims himself to be the Secretary Shiv Sahakari Avas Samuti Limited, Allahabad purchased the rights in the land from N D. Agarwal through three separate registered sale-deeds after obtaining a "no-objection" certificate from the Prescribed Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Allahabad

(3.) The land aforesaid was acquired by the State Government by invoking the provisions of the Act for the benefit of Allahabad Development Authority (for short 'ADA') for residential purposes and an award was made in Case No 132 of 1991 on 72 1991 after due approval by the Board of Revenue on 19 1.1991 Under the award, a sum of Rs 1,17,87,780.89, which was subsequently enhanced to Rs. 1,43,97,169 64p by means of the supplementary award, was made payable as compensation. The ADA allotted the ac quired property in favour of University of Allahabad and in this manner now the ultimate beneficiary of the acquired land is the present petitioner-University of Allahabad-Respondent No. 3 moved the Collector to make a reference under Section 18 of the Act before the Court. Accordingly a reference under Section 18 of the Act was made and it came to be registered as Land Acquisition Case No 132 of 1991. This reference was transferred to the Court of 6th Additional District Judge. Allahabad who after hearing Counsel for parties, framed seven issues in the case on 20.8.1997. The crucial issue No 3 around which centre the controversy between the parties runs as follows