Supreme Court - Daily Orders
State Of U.P. vs Raman Pal Singh on 11 March, 2015
Bench: Dipak Misra, Prafulla C. Pant
CA 2364/13
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
I.A. NO.8 OF 2014
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.2330 OF 2013
State of U.P. and Another Appellant(s)
Versus
Shashi Arora and Another Respondent(s)
O R D E R
This Court on 10th February, 2015, had passed the following order:
“This is an application filed by the Moradabad Development Authority (M.D.A.) containing, inter alia, that the possession of the land in question, which was the subject matter of Civil Appeal No.2330 of 2013, had already been taken over by the State and the same was handed over to the M.D.A., which in turn had utilized it by raising residential and other development projects long back. The said assertion has been countered by the land owners stating, inter alia, that the same is still in their use and they have been utilizing it for agricultural purposes. It has also been asseverated that no residential or other development has been done. To substantiate the said plea, photographs have been annexed. It is also put forth on record that the competent authority vide order dated 9th Signature Not Verified September, 2013, has directed the Tehsildar, Moradabad, U.P., to enter the name of the Digitally signed by Chetan Kumar Date: 2015.03.21 12:09:25 IST Reason: owners in the relevant records in respect of the property in question and that order has been carried out.CA 2364/13 2
Without reflecting on the order passed by the competent authority and the revenue entries, as advised at present, we would like to test the stand put forth by the M.D.A. and the stance in resistance by the owners, that is, whether in actuality there exists any residence on the area in question developed by the M.D.A. The area that is in dispute, is admittedly as follows:
“That the present respondent alongwith others the co-owners of plots No.69/1127 Area 121.41 sq. mt., 66/1137 Area 121.41 sq.mt., 66N area 849.87 sq.mt., 66/1137 area 364.23 sq.mt., and 535 area 1399.54 sq.mt. total 2856.46 sq.mt.
situated in village Bhogpur, Mithauni, District Moradabad.” As the stand put forth by both sides is diametrically opposite, we would like the District Judge, Moradabad, U.P., to submit a report after conducting requisite inquiry, whether residential buildings have come up in the area in question and whether the M.D.A. has constructed or got it constructed. The District Judge shall go himself and, if required, take assistance of others, but everything should happen in his presence, for he will be singularly responsible to this Court. Both the parties are at liberty to appear before the District Judge to take note of the date, so that they can only assist in the identification of the land.
Let a copy of the order passed today be sent by the Registrar to the District Judge, Moradabad, U.P., forthwith. The District Judge is directed to submit report within two weeks from today.” In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the learned District Judge, Moradabad, has sent a report on 19th February, 2015. The said report reads as follows:CA 2364/13 3
“ In compliance of order dated 10.02.2015 of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, notices were issued to all concerned for spot inspection. Thereafter, on 19.02.2015, firstly, I reached Gata No.535, measuring 1399.54 sq.m, situated in village Bhogpur Mithauni. Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue) Moradabad, Vice Chairman, Moradabad Development Authority, Moradabad, Secretary, Moradabad Development Authority, Moradabad, Tahsildar (Sadar), Moradabad, D.C.G. (Civil), Moradabad, and Sri Ravi Arora, son of late Sri V.K. Arora were present and obtained the signatures of the aforesaid officers and parties concerned at the green paper sheet (photostat copy of the signatures of the aforesaid persons is being attached herewith, as Annexure No.1). Sri Ravi Arora told that his father Shri Virendra Kumar Arora has been expired and his mother Smt. Shashi Arora is an old and infirm lady, she is unable to move, hence he is present on her behalf. In Gata No.535, area 1399.54 sq.mt. no development work has been made by the MDA and plot is in the shape of vacant land and rubbish and garbage are lying on the whole plot, except left side of the said plot, where a tin shed construction, covering three Kotharies, exist on the spot. It has been told by Smt. Ram Kali w/o late Sri Guljari, House No.11/44/13B Ward 16, Chandra Nagar Locoshed, Moradabad and her two sons that a Writ Petition No.6720/2009 is pending in the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad about the said disputed land. The said tin shed is in dilapidated condition. One of the Kothari was found allegedly locked by Sri Ravi Arora and rest two Kotharies are found in possession of Smt. Ram Kali, who submitted an application which is being enclosed herewith as Annexure 2. The map prepared by Amin on the spot which is beign enclosed herewith as Annexure 3.
Thereafter, I inspected plots No.69/1127 area 121.41 sq.mt., 66/1137 area 121/41 sq.mt., 66M area 849.87 sq.mt. and 66/1137 area 364.23 sq.mt. situtated in village Bhojpur Mithauni, District Moradabad, CA 2364/13 4 along with the aforesaid officers and concerned parties, and all the area is lying vacant in the shape of barren land (Banjar Land with Grass) and around one of the side of the land, cow-dung cakes and rubbish are lying on the disputed land. In actuality there does not exist any construction or development work on the area in question by the Moradabad Development Authority, Moradabad. The site plan prepared by the Amin, District Court, Moradabad is being attached herewith as Annexure 4.
The compliance report is accordingly submitted.” In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any merit on the grounds urged and put forth in the application filed by the applicant and, resultantly, the application being sans substance, stands dismissed.
......................J. (Dipak Misra) ......................J. (Prafulla C. Pan) New Delhi;
March 11, 2015.CA 2364/13 5
ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.5 SECTION XI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. No.3 of 2014 in Civil Appeal No.2364 of 2013 STATE OF U.P.& ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS RAMAN PAL SINGH & ANR. Respondent(s) (For hearing the newly added petitioner and office report) WITH I.A. No.4 in C.A. No.2367/2013 (With appln.(s) for hearing the newly added petitioner and office report) I.A. No.3 in C.A. No.2427/2013 (With appln.(s) for hearing the newly added petitioner and office report) I.A. No.4 in C.A. No.2497/2013 (With appln.(s) for hearing the newly added petitioner and office report) I.A. No.8 in C.A. No.2330/2013 (With appln.(s) for hearing the newly added petitioner and office report) I.A. No.2 in C.A. No.2332/2013 (With appln.(s) for hearing the newly added petitioner and office report) I.A. No.5 in S.L.P.(C) No.1105/2012 (With appln.(s) for hearing the newly added petitioner and office report) R.P.(C) No.396 of 2014 In C.A. No.2433 of 2013 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing review petition and appln.
(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and office report) I.A. No.3 in C.A. No.2331/2013 (With appln.(s) for hearing the newly added petitioner and office report) Date: 11/03/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT CA 2364/13 6 For Appellant(s) Mr. M. R. Shamshad, AOR Mr. Gunnam Venkateswara Rao, AOR Mr. P.N. Misra, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Abhisth Kumar, AOR Mr. Sudeep Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Somraj Chaudhary, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Deepak Goel, AOR Ms. Bano Desmale, Adv.
Mr. Nagendra Rai, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Dubey, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Agrawal, Adv.
Mr. D.B. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Pramod Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Mahabir Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. M. P. Shorawala, AOR Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR M/s Anuradha & Associates Mr. Arvind Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Laxmi Arvind, AOR Mr. Pradeep Kumar Mathur, Adv.
Mr. Amar Deo Sharma, Adv.
Dr. Kailash Chand, AOR Mr. Abhishek Chaudhary, AOR Mr. Chander Shekhar Ashri, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. No.8 in C.A. No.2330 of 2013 I.A. No.8 stands dismissed in terms of the signed order.CA 2364/13 7
I.A. No.3/2013 in C.A. No.2331/2013 & I.A. No.2/2013 in C.A. No.2332/2013 This Court on 10th February, 2015, had directed the District Judge, Moradabad, U.P., to conduct an enquiry in respect of the plots involved in I.A. No.8 of 2013 in C.A. No.2330 of 2013. The learned District Judge has submitted a report and on the basis of the said report we have dismissed I.A. No.8 of 2013 in the said appeal.
The present interlocutory applications relate to plots bearing Gata No.72 Area 121.41 sq.mts. and Gata No.73 Area 4514.67 situated in village Bhogpur Mithoni, District Moradabad and plot Nos.759 Area 9186.69 sq.mt., 655 Area 9591.28 sq.mt. and 732 Area 4273.27 sq.mt. situated in village Bhogpur Mithoni, District Moradabad. The learned District Judge, Moradabad, is directed to submit a report within three weeks, keeping in view our earlier order passed in I.A. No.8 of 2013.
Registry is directed to list the matters on 7th April, 2015.
Status quo, existing as on today, shall be maintained till the next date of hearing.
I.A. No.3 of 2014 in C.A. No.2364 of 2013, I.A. No.4 of 2014 in C.A. No.2367 of 2013, I.A. No.3/2014 in C.A. No.2427/2013, I.A. No.4/2014 in C.A. No.2497 of 2013 and I.A. No.5 in S.L.P.(C) No.1105 of 2012 CA 2364/13 8 This Court on 10th February, 2015, while taking up I.A. No.8 of 2013 in C.A. No.2330 of 2013, against the Moradabad Development Authority, had passed a detailed order, the relevant part of which is reproduced below:
“This is an application filed by the Moradabad Development Authority (M.D.A.) containing, inter alia, that the possession of the land in question, which was the subject matter of Civil Appeal No.2330 of 2013, had already been taken over by the State and the same was handed over to the M.D.A., which in turn had utilized it by raising residential and other development projects long back. The said assertion has been countered by the land owners stating, inter alia, that the same is still in their use and they have been utilizing it for agricultural purposes. It has also been asseverated that no residential or other development has been done. To substantiate the said plea, photographs have been annexed.
X X X X X X X As the stand put forth by both sides is diametrically opposite, we would like the District Judge, Moradabad, U.P., to submit a report after conducting requisite inquiry, whether residential buildings have come up in the area in question and whether the M.D.A. has constructed or got it constructed. The District Judge shall go himself and, if required, take assistance of others, but everything should happen in his presence, for he will be singularly responsible to this Court. Both the parties are at liberty to appear before the District Judge to take note of the date, so that they can only assist in the identification of the land.” We have quoted the aforesaid order in extenso as we are inclined to direct the District Judge, Meerut, to carry CA 2364/13 9 out the inspection and submit a report to this Court in the similar manner. He will take the assistance of the authorities, but the direction is that he shall himself go to the spot and verify the plots involved in these cases bearing, Khasra Nos.94A and 94B Area 9160.58 sq.mt. situated in village Rajpura, District Meerut, in I.A. No.3/2014 in C.A. No.2364/2013; Gata Nos.93 and 795 Area 12374.11 sq.mt.
situated in village Gaggual, Distric Meerut, in I.A. No.4 in C.A. No.2367/2013; Khasra No.112 Area 7617.68 sq. mt.
situated in village Rajpura, District Meerut, in I.A. No.3/2014 in C.A. No.2427/2013; Gata No.382 Area 1335.24 sq.mt. situated in village Rithani, District Meerut, in I.A. No.4/2014 in C.A. No.2497 of 2013; Khasra Nos.83, 143A and 143B Area 28644 sq.mt. situated in village Raisna, District Meerut, in I.A. No.5 in S.L.P.(C) No.1105 of 2012.
The District Judge, Meerut, is directed to submit a report within four weeks. Let a copy of the order passed today be sent by the Registrar to the District Judge, Meerut, U.P., forthwith. The District Judge is directed to submit report within two weeks from today.
R.P.(C) No.396 of 2014 in C.A. No.2433/2013 This review petition has been filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh, which specifically pertains to the properties CA 2364/13 10 which have been alleged to have been handed over to Kanpur Development Authority. This Court vide judgment dated 11th March, 2013, had not accepted the State being in possession. The possession has not been handed over in accordance with law. What has been brought to our notice is that the Kanpur Development Authority has raised construction and at this juncture, the same should not be disturbed. At this juncture, it is apt to note that in respect of Moradabad Development Authority, while dealing with I.A. No.8 of 2014 in C.A. No.2330 of 2013, this Court had passed the following order:
““This is an application filed by the Moradabad Development Authority (M.D.A.) containing, inter alia, that the possession of the land in question, which was the subject matter of Civil Appeal No.2330 of 2013, had already been taken over by the State and the same was handed over to the M.D.A., which in turn had utilized it by raising residential and other development projects long back. The said assertion has been countered by the land owners stating, inter alia, that the same is still in their use and they have been utilizing it for agricultural purposes. It has also been asseverated that no residential or other development has been done. To substantiate the said plea, photographs have been annexed.
X X X X X X X As the stand put forth by both sides is diametrically opposite, we would like the District Judge, Moradabad, U.P., to submit a report after conducting requisite inquiry, whether residential buildings have come up in the area in question and whether the M.D.A. has constructed or got it constructed. The District Judge shall go himself and, if CA 2364/13 11 required, take assistance of others, but everything should happen in his presence, for he will be singularly responsible to this Court. Both the parties are at liberty to appear before the District Judge to take note of the date, so that they can only assist in the identification of the land.” Regard being had to the same, we direct the District Judge, Kanpur Nagar, U.P. to follow the aforesaid directions in detail without any deviation in respect of the plots mentioned herein, namely, Khasara Nos.472, 473, 480, 434, 492, 452, 455 and 475 Area 9274.90 sq.mt. situated in village Maksudabad and Bra Sirohi, Tehsil and District Kanpur Nagar.
The District Judge, Kanpur Nagar, is directed to submit a report within four weeks hence.
Let these matters be listed on 21st April, 2015. Let a copy of the order passed today be sent by the Registrar to the District Judge, Kanpur Nagar, U.P., forthwith. The District Judge is directed to submit report within two weeks from today.” Status quo, existing as on today, shall be maintained till the next date of hearing.
(Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parashar)
Court Master Court Master