DAYA SHANKAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against acquisition of petitioners' plots under the provisions of Land Ac quisition Act (in short 'act') for the pur pose of construction of building of a col lege namely, Smt. Dropadi Devi Kanya Degree College, Khajani, Gorakhpur (in short 'institution' ). As all the parties are represented through counsel and counter-affidavit as well as rejoinder-affidavit stand exchanged, the writ petition is being finally disposed of at the stage of admis sion in accordance with Rules of the Court.

(2.) THE facts relevant for the purpose of resolving present controversy are that writ petition No. 36990 of 1995 was filed by present petitioners with one Jai Narain in respect of land in dispute. THE petitioners' case is that the writ petition was filed for the reason that the then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh came for laying down foun dation stone of institution's building due to which they apprehended that their pos session will be disturbed without their being any proceeding for requisition or acquisition of the land. THE record of that writ petition is before us from which it appears that each petitioner was required to pay separate Court fee though the writ petition was filed jointly. THE Court fee was not paid. Subsequently, the petitioners counsel deleted petitioners name from array of parties and the writ petition proceeded with Jai Narain as sole petitioner. That writ petition was ul timately dismissed for default. While that writ petition was pending, the State Government issued notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act on 16-8-1996 for acquiring the disputed land, the public purpose as declared being for construction of building of the institution. THE notifica tion also mentioned that the proceedings under Section 5-A will not be applicable. THE notification under Section 6 was is sued on 17-4-1977, which was followed by notice under Section 9 of the Act.

(3.) THE main question of law, which require determination in this case is a's to whether it is open for Special Land Ac quisition Officer to entertain an objection and reduce amount of compensation proposed to be given by allowing objection of the person for whose benefit the land is acquired but before taking up said ques tion we would like to dispose of other questions which have not found favour with us.