AFR

Reserved on 16.8.2021

Delivered on 06.9.2021

Court No. - 32

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4340 of 2021

Petitioner :- Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar Trust

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Safdar Ali Kazmi

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

1.

Heard Sri Syed Safdar Ali Kazmi, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, learned Additional Advocate

General along with Sri Sudhanshu Srivastava, learned Additional

Chief Standing Counsel for the State.

2.

The present petition has been preferred for quashing of report

dated 16.03.2020 submitted by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Rampur as

well as for quashing the order dated 16.01.2021 passed by Additional

District Magistrate (Administration) Rampur/respondent No.2 in

proceedings initiated under Section 104/105 of the U.P. Revenue

Code, 2006 (hereinafter called as “the Code”).

3.

The facts, in nutshell, as disclosed in the petition are that

petitioner is a Society registered under the provisions of Societies

Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter called as “Act, 1860”) in the year

1995. It was in the year 2005 that State of Uttar Pradesh enacted U.P.

Act No.19 of 2006 and thus came into existence the Mohammad Ali

Jauhar University Act, 2005 (hereinafter called as “Act, 2005”). The

preamble of the Act, 2005 was as under :

“An Act to establish and incorporate a Teaching University

sponsored by Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar Trust at Rampur

in Uttar Pradesh and to provide for matters connected

therewith or incidental thereto.”

2

4.

Pursuant to the enactment of Act, 2005, the State Government

in exercise of power under Section 154(2) of U.P. Zamindari Abolition

& Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter called as “Act, 1950”) on

07.11.2005 granted permission to Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar

Trust (hereinafter called as “Trust”) to acquire 400 acres of land

against ceiling of 12.5 acres (5.0586 hectare) for establishment of

University. The said permission was granted with certain

restrictions/conditions, which are as under :

^^¼1½

mDr Hkwfe /kkfjr djus gsrq fd;k x;k laØe.k izpfyr vf/kfu;eksa]

fu;eksa] fofu;eksa vkfn ,oa le;≤ ij tkjh fd, x;s 'kklukns’kksa ds

v/khu gksxkA

¼2½

mDr VªLV }kjk Hkwfe dk mi;ksx vafdr 'kS{kf.kd laLFkkvks dh

LFkkiuk@fuekZ.k gsrq ;g vkns’k tkjh gksus ds 05 o"kZ ds Hkhrj dj fy;k

tk;sxk ,oa fdlh Hkh n’kk esa mDr iz;kstu ls fHkUu iz;kstu ds fy, ugha

fd;k tk;sxkA

¼3½

laLFkk@mlds fdlh Hkh inkf/kdkjh }kjk Hkwfe dk dksbZ Hkh Hkkx

fdlh laLFkk@O;fDr dks fdlh Hkh :i esa 'kklu dh iwokZuqefr ds fcuk

gLrkUrj.k ugha fd;k tk;sxk] ysfdu _.k izkIr djus ds mn~ns’; ls mDr

VªLV dks iz’uxr Hkwfe fcuk dCtk fn, foRrh; laLFkkvksa ds i{k esa cU/kd

j[kus dk vf/kdkj jgsxkA

¼4½

VªLV }kjk izR;sd foRrh; o"kZ ds vUr rd Ø;@/kkfjr dh xbZ

Hkwfe@fuekZ.k vkfn dk foLr`r fooj.k ftykf/kdkjh] jkeiqj }kjk 'kklu dh

izR;sd vizSy ekl esa izLrqr fd;k tk;sxkA

¼5½

mi;qZDr fdlh Hkh ’krZ dk mYya?ku gksus ij 12-50 ,dM ls] tks Hkh

Hkwfe vf/kd gksxh] mls jkT; ljdkj esa fufgr dj fy;k tk;sxk rFkk ,sls

fufgru ds cnys dksbZ izfrdj ugha fn;k tk,xk] ysfdu ,sls fufgru ds

iwoZ VªLV dks lquokbZ dks ,d volj iznku fd;k tk;sxkA

3

¼6½

VªLV }kjk LFkkfir fd;s tkus okys f’k{k.k laLFkkuksa@ladk;ksa gsrq fu/

kkZfjr ekud ds vuqlkj Hkwfe rFkk mlls lEcfU/kr ,u0vks0lh0 iz’kklfud

foHkkx ds fu/kkZfjr ekud ds vuqlkj izkIr fd;k tkuk gksxkA**

5.

Thereafter, on 17.01.2006, the State Government further

permitted the petitioner-Trust to purchase 45.91 acres (18.587 hectare)

land. The said permission was in continuation with earlier order dated

07.11.2005 with the same condition. Thereafter, on 16.9.2006, an

additional permission for purchase of 25 acres land was granted by the

State Government to the Trust with the same conditions as was laid

down in the earlier order dated 7.11.2005. Copies of permission

granted by the State Government have been brought on record as

Annexures 3, 4 and 5 to the writ petition.

6.

Acc