By the Court.—Heard Shri Anurag Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the respondents.

2. The petitioner is owner of plot No. 191 area 0.8 decimal (32 Ayar) situated in Mauja Ghatampur, Pargana Kaswar Raja, District Varanasi. In CH Form 2-Ka the plot is shown to be measuring 28 Ayar. In the year 1981 the possession of the plot No. 191 was taken by the Irrigation Department for installation of a government tubewell without acquiring the land or paying any compensation. The petitioner made several representations in the years 1986, 1991 and 1999 to the Executive Engineer, Tubewell Constructions Division-I, Varanasi without any result. He filed a Writ Petition No. 3816 of 2000 in which this Court, by its order dated 27.1.2000, directed the District Magistrate, Varanasi to decide his representation. The District Magistrate, Varanasi issued notices to the petitioner and the Executive Engineer, Tubewell Constructions Division-I, Varanasi. In his order dated 29.3.2002 the District Magistrate observed that the Executive Engineer in his letter No. 832 dated 3.3.2000 has accepted that tubewell No. 3 was constructed in the year 1981 but for some reasons he did not forward the proposals for acquisition of the land on which the farmers have not received any compensation. The proceedings have been initiated now for purchasing the land by settlement after which the compensation will be paid with the approval of the Committee constituted by the State Government.

3. The District Magistrate found that the petitioner’s land was taken away in the year 1981 for constructions to install tubewell without making any proposal for acquisition of the land or paying any compensation. He directed the petitioner to approach the Executive Engineer for purchase of land by settlement and to pay the compensation. The negotiation proceedings were directed to be completed within one month, failing which proceedings were to be initiated, for acquisition of the land so that the compensation could be determined.

4. This writ petition was filed on 8.9.2000 for a writ of mandamus directing the Executive Engineer, Tubewell Construction Division-I, Varanasi-respondent No. 2 to pay the sale price of the petitioner’s land acquired by the department with interest on the allegations that after the order of the District Magistrate the petitioner has approached respondent No. 2 several times and made representations but no steps were taken in the matter.

5. In the counter affidavit of Shri M.R. Dhiman, Additional City Magistrate-III/Incharge Special Land Acquisition Officer, Varanasi the fact of construction to install a tubewell over plot No. 191 is admitted. However, it is stated :

“3. ........ However, certain developments took place during the enquiry made by the Committee constituted by the order of the Collector and it was detected that the land against which compensation is being sought by the petitioner went in the chak of the third party on the basis of a compromise entered into before the consolidation officer to which the petitioner was also one of the party. Accordingly, the said committee reported that the petitioner has no right to receive compensation as he ceases to be the owner of the land in question. The petitioner having come to know of the subsequent developments filed an application for exclusion of plot No. 191/2 area 28 Ares from the order accepting compromise passed by the Consolidation Officer. The said application was rejected against which an appeal was filed before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation, Varanasi. The Settlement Officer, Consolidation, however, allowed the appeal in respect to the plot in question. But it appears that the other party of the compromise has filed some application before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation and the Settlement Officer, Consolidation, Varanasi stayed the operation of his order allowing the petitioner’s appeal. The matter of title, therefore, is still