ARCHANA DEY Vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDSLIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners pray for quashing of the order dated 17-10-1989 (Annex. P-5) passed by the Estate Officer under the provisions of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). By the said order the petitioners have been directed to remove their unauthorised construction over the land. The petitioners further pray for quashing of the judgment of the appellate court dated 25-1-1995 passed by the District Judge, Bilaspur, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioners, has been dismissed.

(2.) Short facts, giving rise to the present writ petition, are that a project known as Gevra project was started with the aid and assistance of the World Bank for Supplying Coal to National Thermal Power Corporation, Korba. One of the mines in the Gevra area is Dipka Augmentation Project which is exclusively meant to supply coal to N.T.P.C. Korba and the distance between the two is about 25 Kms. For supply of coal, it was decided that the 2 points be connected by railways. By notification dated 19-10-1981, Govt. of India, under the provision of Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 acquired verious plots including part of Plot No. 416. According to the respondents the Plots acquired 416/4, having an area of 0.42 decimal, 416/ 5 having an area of 0.30 decimal and 416/6, having an area of 0.72 decimal. It is admitted position that total area of plot No. 416 acquired is 1.44 acre. According to respondents 1 and 2 construction made by the petitioner is over a land which is part of Plot No. 416. The stand of the petitioners, however, is that the land over which the construction has been made was not acquired. According to the petitioners the total area of plot No. 416 in village Dipka is 20.44 acres and only a part thereof i.e. 1.44 acres was acquired. It is further averred by the petitioners that in the revenue records of 1943-44, the disputed land was recorded in the name of one Ghasiyageda and the land in question fell into the share of Itwar, his son. The said Itwar vide registered sale deed dated 25-7-1986 sold a part of his land to the petitioner No. 2 Islam Khan. The aforesaid ltwar, according to the petitioners executed another sale deed in favour of Usman Ali who later on by registered sale deed dated 23-3-1988 sold the land to petitioner No. l. It is the stand of the petitioners that they have constructed houses over their respective plots after investing their entire saving. It is relevant here to state that the notification for acquisition was made on 19-10-1981 and the petitioner have purchased the land after its acquisition. However, the controversy in the case pertains to the identification of the land. It is admitted position that 1.44 acres out of the total area of plot No. 416 was acquired and according to the petitioners the land over which the houses have been constructed did not form part of the acquired land whereas according to the respondents 1 and 2 the houses have been constructed over their acquired land.

(3.) The Estate Officer served a notice under Section 5A (2) of the Act on the petitioners saying that they have unauthorisedly constructed the building or raised the structure on the acquired land of plot No. 416 and called upon the petitioners to remove the building structure or to show cause why the same be not removed. The petitioners showed their cause. The Estate Officer on analysis of the evidence produced on behalf of the parties held that the building has been constructed over the acquired land. The petitioners preferred an appeal against the aforesaid order which has been dismissed by the District Judge. The aforesaid orders of the Estate Officer as also the District Judge are being impugned in the present writ petition.