SHIV SHANKAR SHRIVASTAVA Vs. JABALPUR DEVEOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this petition praying for a direction to the respondents/authorities to allot a plot of land in Scheme No. 11 in compliance of the decision taken by it.

(2.) IT is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was owner of 2000 sq. ft. of land, that was a part of khasra no. 8/2, Mouja Ranipur, Patwari circle No. 25, Jabalpur which the petitioner had purchased from the erstwhile owner Smt. Manorama Bai Shukla. It is submitted that the said land was acquired by the Town Improvement Trust for the purpose of implementing Scheme No. 11 framed by them in the year 1976 and possession thereof was taken in the year 1977. Subsequently, the Town Improvement Trust has been dissolved and liability and assets thereof have been taken over by the Jabalpur Development Authority. It is stated that on 05.03.1986 the Joint Tribunal, All Town Improvement Trusts, State of M.P. passed an award in respect of the acquisition of the petitioner's land behind the back of the petitioner without impleading him as a party and in his place impleading Mrs. Manorama Bai Shukla, the erstwhile owner of the property. It is stated that prior to the passing of the award, the petitioner had approached the respondents objecting to taking over of his plot pursuant to which the respondent/JDA agreed to allot another plot to the petitioner in lieu of the petitioner's land that was acquired but subsequently the respondents by their letter dated 07.12.1983 (Annexure P/5) offered to allot a plot to the petitioner in Scheme no. 5 instead of Scheme No. 11 which was refused by the petitioner.

(3.) IN view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case this court by order dated 04.10.2012 had directed the parties to resolve the issue amicably. Pursuant to which the respondent/JDA by communication dated 19.10.12 proposed that they were willing to pay the petitioner compensation for his agricultural land as on the date it was acquired or in the alternative it was willing to offer him a developed plot equal to 20% of the petitioner land acquired by them as per their policy or price of the same or thirdly, to compensate the petitioner in terms of the award passed in the year 1986 along with the interest.