DINESH CHAND GOYAL Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Petition No.4286 of 2010 (hereinafter referred to as "First Petition") under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed by five petitioners namely Dinesh Chand Goyal, Smt. Minakshi Goyal, Smt. Daya Rani, Mukesh Goyal and Vinay Goyal praying for issue of a writ of certiorari for quashing notifications dated 23.7.2009 issued under Section 4 read with Section 17 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1894"), and, dated 24.12.2009 issued under Section 6 of Act, 1894 in respect of Arazi No.103M area 0.2904 Hectares, situated in Village Barhpura, Pargana and Tehsil Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar; another sets of notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of Act, 1894 on the same date i.e. 23.7.2009 and 24.12.2009 respectively but therein different numbers of Gatas in respect of Khasra No.774, area 0.2020 Hectares, situated in Village Dadri, Pargana and Tehsil Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar. A further writ of mandamus has been prayed commanding respondents not to interfere in peaceful possession of petitioners over land in dispute and not to demolish construction raised over the said land.

(2.) The facts in brief giving rise to First Petition are that Khasra No.103, situated in village Barhpura and Khasra No.774, situated in Village Dadri are border plots, in a situation where both constitute a large single plot and the same were in possession and ownership of Smt. Shanti Devi, grand mother of petitioners. Smt. Shanti Devi was also recorded as owner of said plot in Revenue records. Smt. Shanti Devi executed a Will dated 15.10.2008 in favour of petitioners and after her death, land in question was succeeded by petitioners and their names were mutated in Revenue record in respect of Khasra no.774 area 0.5190 hects., Village Dadri and Khasra No.103 area 0.3667 hects. situated in village Barhpura. Order of mutation was passed by Naib Tehsildar on 19.8.2009 and entries were made in Revenue record on 28.10.2009/06.10.2009. There existed petitioner's commercial establishment on disputed land namely M/s Baba Auto Mobiles, which is a dealership of Sonalika Tractors. It comprises of a showroom, workshop, service hall and other constructions. A Farm House namely Suraj Farm House and a Rice Mill named Baba Rice Mills are also existing on the said land.

(3.) A public notice was issued by Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as "GNIDA") notifying various land including disputed land of petitioners, proposing to acquire the said land by mutual negotiations with land owners. It was also stated in the advertisement that if any person has objection, he may file the same before Chief Executive Officer of GNIDA. Since petitioners' grand mother was alive at the time of publication of above notice and in the said notice name of petitioners' grand mother was mentioned, she filed objection dated 24.6.2008 stating that entire land is occupied by business establishments, therefore, she is not interested to sell it to GNIDA. No decision taken by GNIDA was ever communicated to petitioners' grand mother or petitioners. Thereafter, following notifications were issued under Sections 4 read with 17 of Act, 1894 and declaration under Section 6 proposing acquisition of disputed land for the benefit of GNIDA were published: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_142_LAWS(ALL)7_2019_1.html</FRM>