IMPORTANT POINT
Review jurisdiction is limited to errors apparent on the face of the record; it cannot involve re-evaluation of evidence or serve as an appeal.

JUDGMENT :

Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No.1 of 2023

1. Learned counsel for the respondents states that he is not inclined to file an objection to the delay condonation application and he has no objection in case delay condonation application is allowed.

2. For the reasons stated in affidavit filed in support of delay condonation application, as the same constitutes sufficient cause for condoning delay in filing review application, the delay condonation application is allowed. The review application is treated to have been filed well within time.

Review Application

1. Heard Sri Jai Shanker Misra, learned counsel for the applicants/petitioners and Sri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the respondent/NOIDA.

2. The instant review application is preferred to review the judgment and order dated 22.04.2022 passed by the Division Bench in Writ C No.10106 of 2022 (Chetram Chauhan @ Mintu and others vs. State of U.P. and 3 others).

Factual Matrix

3. Record reflects that the applicants-petitioners were owners with transferable right of Khasra No.422M/0.9700 hec., 428M/0.6410 hec. and 570M/0.7460 hec. situated in Village Sadarpur, Tehsil Dadri, District Gautam Buddh Nagar. The State Government vide notifications dated 30.03.2002 and 28.06.2003 had acquired the land of different villages of NOIDA and Greater NOIDA including the land of petitioners in Khasra No.422 and 428. The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction for a direction commanding second respondent/Chief Executive Officer, New Okhala Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA), Gautam Buddh Nagar to pay compensation @ Rs.44,000/- per square meter in place of Rs.22,000/-per square meter for 5% additional abadi land in respect of the acquired land of petitioners i.e. Khasra Nos.422M & 428M situated in Village Sadarpur, Pargana & Tehsil Dadri, District Gautam Buddha Nagar in the light of the judgment and order dated 21.10.2011 passed by the Full Bench of this Court in Gajraj Singh & others Vs. State of U.P. & others, 2011 (11) ADJ 1 (FB). A Division Bench vide judgment and order dated 22.04.2022 had dismissed the writ petition. For ready reference, the judgment and order dated 22.04.2022 is quoted herein under:-

“1. The prayer made in the present petition is for a direction to the respondent no.2 to pay compensation @ Rs. 44,000/- per square meter in place of Rs. 22,000/- per square meter for 5% additional abadi land with reference to the acquisition thereof in Village - Sadarpur, Pargana & Tehsil - Dadri, District - Gautam Buddha Nagar in terms of the judgement of the Full Bench of this Court in Gajraj Singh & others Vs. State of U.P. & others reported in 2011 (11) ADJ 1 (FB).

2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the respondents pointed out that challenge to the acquisition pertaining to land of Village - Sadarpur vide same notification was considered by the Full Bench of this Court in Gajraj Singh (supra) and the writ petitions were dismissed. Hence, the petitioners cannot be granted any benefit in terms thereof.

3. To this, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that only three writ petitions pertaining to Village - Sadarpur were dismissed and not all of them.

4. We are not impressed with this argument. Whatever writ petitions, pertaining to acquisition of land in Village - Sadarpur vide same notification were listed before the Full Bench of this Court, the same were specifically dismissed. That does not mean that any further relief, which was not granted to the writ petitioners before the Full Bench of this Court, could be granted to any other land owners.

5. For the reasons stated above, we do not find any merit in the present petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed.”

Submission of the review applicants/petitioners

4. Learned counsel for the applicants-petitioners vehemently submitted that earlier the petitioners had preferred Writ Petition No.44 of 2012 (Raj Kumar and others vs. State of UP and others) and the same was disposed of by the Div