CW2716/2007 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2716/2007 Shri Mahendra Kumar Agrawal and Others Vs. The Land Acquisition Officer (A.D.M.II), Jaipur and Others Date of Order ::: 13.12.2010 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri M.M. Ranjan, Counsel for petitioners Shri Pradeep Kalwania, Additional Government Counsel for respondent State Shri Inderjeet Singh, Counsel for respondent no.3 #### By the Court:- This writ petition has been filed by petitioners Mahendra Kumar Agrawal and Others, challenging order passed by Land Acquisition Officer (ADM II), Jaipur dated 03.04.2006. Petitioners had filed an application before Land Acquisition Officer under Sections 15A, 18 and 30 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, inter-alia, on premise that they had purchased certain plots from Vishwakarma Griha Nirman Sahakari Samiti Limited and constructed wall there-around in 1996. They are still in possession of the land. The land is part of independent Khasra No.24/1 measuring 18 bigha 15 biswa. Respondents are illegally seeking dispossession of petitioners, therefore, a prayer was made that Respondents be restrained from dispossessing them from the land in qeustion. Land CW2716/2007 // 2 // Acquisition Officer rejected said application. Shri M.M. Ranjan, learned counsel for petitioners, argued that Respondents have not acquired land of Khasra No.24/1 measuring 18 bigha 15 biswa. From the award it is evident that respondents have acquired land measuring 9 bigha 7 biswa out of khasra No.24. This court vide order dated 27.10.2010 required respondents to file specific affidavit to clarify that they have not done so. Learned counsel referred to 'jamabandi' of Samvat 2062 to 2065 to argue that it is khasra no.24/1, total area of which was 18 bigha 15 biswa which has been divided into two parts respectively as khasra no.24/1 measuring 9 bigha 7 biswa, and khasra no.24/1 measuring 9 bigha 8 biswa. Unless Respondents are able to show existence of khasra no.24, they cannot acquire or take possession of land of petitioners. It is contended that no citizen can be divested of his property or otherwise dispossessed without due process of law. Shri Inderjeet Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.3, opposed writ petition and submitted that land measuring 9 bigha 7 biswa was in khasra no.24/155 which was mutated in favour of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Jaipur vide mutation no.165 dated 13.10.2006, and it is remaining land measuring 9 bigha 8 biswa, which was then part of khasra no.24/1, which respondents have not acquired. He also referred to some 'jamabandi' and report of Tehsildar dated 07.04.2007 and subsequent CW2716/2007 // 3 // report of Tehsildar dated 04.10.2010 to contend that while khasra no.24/155 consisted of 9 bigha 7 biswa, remaining land of khasra no.24/1 measuring 9 bigha 8 biswa was then part of khasra no.24/1. It was contended that this land was recorded in khatedari of Ram Singh Son of Ishardan Singh and this land was acquired and compensation was paid to him. His compensation was deposited with Land Acquisition Officer. If petitioners had purchased such land after notification under Section 4 of the Act, such acquisition is nullity. They cannot be dispossessed. Learned counsel lastly reiterated that respondents have already taken possession of that land which is part of khasra no.24/1 measuring 9 bigha 7 biswa in terms of award dated 01.07.2000. Having heard learned counsel for parties and perused material on record, I find that Land Acquisition Officer could not have, after the award was passed, entertained application filed by petitioners six years after the award passed by him. Even if the award simply refers to khasra no.24 and not khasra no.24/155, it is obvious from mutation entries referred to in 'jamabandi' of Samvat 2062 to 2065. This land was entered in name of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Jaipur on basis of award and acquisition made and only land measuring 9 bigha 7 biswa was taken out of entire khasra, which was numbered as khasra no.24/155 and remaining part of total measurement i.e. 18 bigha 15 biswa, which then remained only 9 bigha 8 biswa, CW2716/2007 // 4 // was in their khasra no.24/1. Respondents are not claiming any land out of that khasra no.24/1 measuring 9 bigha 8 biswa. It cannot therefore be said that Respondents have taken possession of the land in question without due process of law or that the land is not duly acquired. Even otherwise acquisition of land is not under challenge in this writ petition obviously because the land holder has not objected acquisition or may have accepted the compensation. I do not therefore find no merit in this writ petition and it is accordingly dismissed. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//