Point of Law : Date of determination of market value should be recorded as 1.1.2014 in view of the Central Government orders under Section 113 of the Act.

JUDGMENT :

SUNITA AGARWAL, J.

1. Heard Sri Raj Narayan Tiwari learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Ambarish Shukla learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondent. Shri Alok Mishra, learned Advocate has received notices on behalf of the respondent-NOIDA.

2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners herein, who are heirs and legal representatives of Raghunath Rai Sharma son of Sri Munshiram Sharma, resident of 85 Model New Colony, Filmistan, New Delhi, the original tenure holder of Khasra No. 39M. area 0-14-0 Bigha situated in revenue Village Gejha Tilpatabad, Pargana and Tehsil Dadari, District Gautam Budh Nagar, the acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 vide notifications dated 13.1.1995 and 21.9.1995 under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894; respectively, seek the following relief:-

“(i) a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding and directing the respondents authorities to make payment of compensation award for the acquired land in the year 1995 bearing Khasra No. 39M Area-0-14-0 bigha situated in Village Gejha Tilpatabad, Pargana, Tehsil Dadari, District Gautam Budh Nagar belonging to petitioner's ancestors namely Raghunath Rai Sharma as per the prevailing market rate in the light of Section – 24 (1) (a) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 within stipulated period otherwise to vacate the land in question forthwith along with suitable damages compensation.

(ii) a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding and directing the respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the pending representation dated 18.2.2021 within stipulated period.

(iii) Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem, just and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(iv) Issue the award cost of this petition petitioner.”

3. The assertions in the writ petition are that the symbolic possession of an area 44.312 acres of the acquired land was taken on 6.2.1998, however, possession of the remaining area of 76.848 acres could not be taken on account of the pendency of the writ petitions filed by one Maharshi Ved Vigyan Vidyapeeth and other tenure holders wherein interim order was granted by this Court. The writ petitions were dismissed on 7.4.2004 and Special Leave Petition Nos. 21130/2004 and 21143/2004 were dismissed on 21.4.2006. After dismissal of the Special Leave Petitions, the possession memo of 76.848 acres of acquired land was prepared on 31.5.2006, whereunder the possession of Khasra No. 39 area 2-9-0 Bigha had been taken. A copy of the possession memo is appended as Annexure ‘4’ to the writ petition.

4. It is stated in the writ petition that Khasra No. 39 area 1-15-0 Bigha (0.4430 hectares) was recorded in the name of Maharshi Ved Vigyan Vidyapeeth and Khasra No. 39M. area 0-14-0 Bigha was recorded in the name of Raghunath Rai Sharma, the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners herein. The copy of the revenue record of Khasra No. 39, being in the name of Maharshi Ved Vigyan Vidyapeeth is appended as Annexure ‘5’ to the writ petition. However, the record of entry of Khasra No. 39M. in the name of predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners namely Raghunath Rai Sharma has not been appended with the writ petition.

5. Be that as it may, the dispute raised in the present writ petition is with regard to the determination of compensation of Khasra No. 39M. area 0-14-0, i.e. 0.1771 hectares.

6. On the presentation of the writ petition, on the written instructions provided by the learned Standing Counsel dated 17.12.2022 under the signature of the Additional District Magistrate (Land Acquisition), Gautam Budh Nagar addressed to the learned Chief Standing Counsel, High Court, Allahabad, taking note of the stand of the respondent-State therein, the o