(1.) This appeal by the Government respondent appellant is from the judgment and order dated 20-6-96 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court Division in Writ Petition No. 1312 of 1993 making the Rule Nisi absolute.
(2.) The predecessors of 13 writ petitioner respondents were owners of 11.34 acres of land, out of a total area of 21.95 acres with in C.S. Khatian No. 3170 of Muza 211 Baunia, P.S. Mirpur, District Dhaka. Along with other properties the case property measuring more or less 1465.05 acres of land was requisitioned under section 3 of the (Emergency) Requisition of Property Act, 1948 for the purpose of housing and settlement by the then Government of East Pakistan vide L.A. Case No.13 of 1959-60. By Gazette Notification dated 28.11.80, Published in the official Gazette on 18.12.80 the Ministry of land Administration and Land Reforms acquired the requisitioned property, but the case property was not acquired. By a subsequent L. A. case, L. A. case No. 5 of 1972-73, part of the two C.S. plots, namely, 3171 and 3474, were acquired by Gazette Notification but no specific area was mentioned there in. An information slip supplied by the Land Acquisition Department shows that in L.A. Case No.5 of 1972-73, 0.78 acres out of 9.45 acres in plot No. 3171 and 0.30 acres out of 5.10 acres of C.S. plot No. 3474 were acquired by final Notification along with other plots, but C.S. plot No. 3170 measuring 1.21 acres was not acquired in either of the two L.A. cases. In the writ petition the writ petitioner respondents prayed for releasing 1.21 acres of plot No. 3170, 9.45 acres minus 0.78 acres from plot No. 3171 and 5.10 acres minus 0.30 acres from plot No. 3474. The Additional Deputy Commissioner (1.A) by an order Dated 13.9.92 recommended for release of 14.42 acres in L.A. Case 13 of 1959-60. The writ petitioners also claimed to be in possession of the land sought to be released.
(3.) The respondent appellants in their affidavit-in-opposition contended that the case property now being sought to be released was requisitioned for the purpose of acquisition to set up a satellite town at Mirpur and for housing and settlement purposes. Awards were prepared in the name of the predecessors of the writ petitioners for all the plots in question and they received compensation money from the appellants without any objection. Possession of the requisitioned lands including the case property was handed over to the requiring body, respondent No. 4 in the writ petition through a possession certificate dated 22-3-1960. The case property has been allotted to various affected persons including the writ petitioners. The allotters are possessing the case properties by constructing buildings and residential quarters. By a mere press release inviting general information about unauthorized occupation of lands in and around the city of Dhaka the writ petitioners have not been bestowed with any legal right for release of the case property from requisition. The writ petitioners have filed title suit No. 188 of 1992 in the 1st Court of Assistant Judge, Dhaka and Title suit No. 96 of 1993in the 2nd Court of subordinate Judge, Dhaka in respect of the self same case property which are still pending and as such the writ petition is not maintainable.