SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(Raj) 433

(Rajasthan High Court)
Jaipur Bench
Chhotu Ram & Anr. Vs. State of Raj. & Anr. (Ambwani, Actg. CJ.)
HON'BLE SUNIL AMBWANI, ACTG. C.J.
HON'BLE PRAKASH GUPTA, J.
Chhotu Ram & Anr.
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Anr.
D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.201 of 2015, decided on 27.02.2015

Advocates Appeared
R.K.Agarwal, Senior Advocate assisted by Pradeep Choudhary for Appellants;
Rajendra Prasad, Addl. Advocate General with Ashish Sharma, for State-Respondents

Headnote:Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 — Writ petition after delay of 12 years for implementation of decision of Settlement Committee — Held — Failed to deposit the amount within stipulated period — The surplus land vested in the State after proceedings under the Act of 1976 and possession was taken over in 1986 — Settlement Committee stood dissolved — Appellants unauthorisedly occupied the land constructed 55 shops and 7 marriage gardens — A writ of mandamus cannot be issued after a period of 12 years in a case of non-compliance of directions — His conduct disentitles him to discretionary relief — May apply for return of part of amount which will be returned after deducting penalties. (Paras 18 to 23)

       Special appeal dismissed in limine with costs.

        Hkwfe ¼lhfyax vkSj fu;eu½ vf/kfu;e] 1976 & lSVyesaV desVh ds fu.kZ; dks ykxw djkus gsrq 12 o"kZ ds foyEc ds ckn fjV ;kfpdk & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & fofufnZ"V vof/k esa jkf'k tek djkus esa foQy jgk & 1976 ds vf/kfu;e ds rgr dk;Zokgh ds i'pkr~ vkf/kD; Hkwfe ljdkj esa fufgr gks x;h vkSj 1986 esa dCtk Hkh ys fy;k x;k Fkk & lsVyesaV desVh Hkax dh tk pqdh Fkh & vihykFkhZ us vuf/kd`r :i ls Hkwfe ij dCtk dj 55 nqdkuksa vkSj 7 eSjht xkMZUl dk fuekZ.k djok;k & funsZ'kksa dh vuuqikyuk ds ekeys esa 12 o"kksZ dh vof/k ds ckn ijekns'k ;kfpdk tkjh ugha dh tk ldrh & mldk vkpj.k gh mls oSosfdd vuqrks"k gsrq v;ksX; Bgjkrk gS & va'kr% jkf'k ykSVkus gsrq vkosnu dj ldrk gS tks 'kkfLr dh dVkSfr ds i'pkr~ ykSVk;h tk;sxhA

       fo'ks"k vihy vkjEHk esa [kpsZ lfgr [kkfjt dhA ¼in la[;k 18 ls 23½

Hon'ble AMBWANI, ACTG. C.J.—We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. This Special Appeal arises out of the judgment of learned Single Judge dated 25.2.2015, by which the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12656/2014 was dismissed, on the grounds that the question of taking over possession of the land, which was declared surplus, under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short, 'the ULC Act'), and of which, the possession was taken on 06.12.1986, is not open to be considered, after the writ petition filed in the year 1991, the appeal arising therefrom, were dismissed, and that, the Supreme Court had also dismissed the Special Leave Petition, as withdrawn.

3. The writ petition was filed, with the following prayers:-

"A. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to regularize the land of the petitioners bearing Khasra No. 193, 193/248 situated in Village Beed Khatipura, Jaipur in compliance of the order dated 10.4.2002 (Annex.1) passed by the State Level Committee;

B. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed not to take possession of the land of the petitioners in Khasra No. 193, 193/248 situated in Village Beed Khatipura, Jaipur;

C. By an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents may kindly be directed not to deprive the petitioners of their legitimate right of enjoyment of property;

C-1. By an appropriate writ, order or direction the notices dated 20.11.2014 (Annexure- 14, 15, 17 & 18) issued by the respondent no. 2 under section 72 of the JDA Act, 1982 to the petitioners may kindly be quashed and set aside and further all the notices u/s 72 of JDA Act, 1982 dated 14.11.2014 issued regarding the shops situated on kno. 193 and 193/248 be also quashed and set aside and all subsequent action taken in furtherance thereof also be quashed and set aside.

C-2. By an appropriate writ, order or direction the orders dated 17.11.2014 (Annexure-9 & Annexure-11) passed by the respondent no. 1 and orders dated 20.11.2014 (Annexure-8 & Annexure-10) passed by the respondent no. 2 may be quashed and set aside.

C-3. By an appropriate writ, order or direction all the notices dated 11.11.2014 issued under section 34(A) of the Act of 1982 be also quashed and set aside.

C-4. By an appropriate writ, order or direction it may be held that the subject land of khasra no. 193 & 193/248 situated at Beedkhatipura, Jaipur is not government property and the petitioners are having legal and valid title & rights the said land.

D. Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in favour of the petitioners may also be passed.

E. Cost of the writ petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioners."

4. Brief facts giving rise to this Special Appeal are that Khasra No.193 measuring 25 bighas & 2 biswas and khasra No.193/248 measuring 12 bighas & 5 biswas, were declared as surplus, in proceedings under the ULC Act. An appeal against the determination of surplus land was dismissed by the Divisional Commissioner on 29.03.1993. The possession of the lands was taken, after using necessary force, on 06.12.1986. The memo-'fard' was also prepared. The lands were recorded, after mutation was carried out in the name of the Jaipur Development Authority, on 17.8.1991. With the dismissal of the appeal against the declaration of surplus land, the proceedings under the ULC Act attained finality.

5. The ULC Act was repealed on 7.10.1999. By that date, since the lands were already taken in possession by the State Government, and had vested in the State Government, and that, the cheques for compensation were also issued to the petitioners, nothing was pending to abate the proceedings.

6. In the year 2001, Section 83A was added in the Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982, under which a Settlement Committee was constituted. The appellants approached the Settlement Committee for regularizatio


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top