IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1046 of 2007 (M/S) Sameer Kumar Agrawal S/O Late Shri Babu Ram Agrawal, R/O 53, Dehradun Road, Rishikesh, District Dehradun. …… Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand through its Chief Secretary, Govt. of Uttarakhand, Secretariat Subhash Road, Dehradun and two others. … Respondents. Sri Lokpal Singh and Sri Tapan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri L.P.Naithani, Advocate General with Sri K.P.Upadhyay, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents no. 1 & 2. Sri S.Dhulia, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Puja Banga, learned counsel for M.D.D.A.-respondent no. 3 Date May 23, 2008. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Sri Lokpal Singh and Sri Tapan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri L.P.Naithani, Advocate General with Sri K.P.Upadhyay, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State and Sri S.Dhulia, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Puja Banga, learned counsel for respondent no.3. This writ petition has been filed for issue a writ of certiorari quashing the condition imposed by respondent nos. 1 and 2 in Notification dated 12-10-2006 contained as Annexure No. 7 to the writ petition, whereby the condition has been imposed that the petitioner will not change the use of land for next ten years. Prayer has also been made for mandamus commanding the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to change the land use of the petitioner’s land in pursuance of Government Order dated 19-9-2006 contained as Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition. Relevant facts giving rise to the present writ petition in brief are that according to the petitioner, he is a recorded tenure holder with transferable rights of the land bearing Khasra Nos. 85, measuring 0.4595 hectare, 87, measuring 0.8310 Heactare, 88 2 measuring 0.4500 Hectare, 89, measuring 0.4900 Hectare, 90, measuring 0.1500 Hectare, 91 measuring 0.1370 Hectare, 105 Ka, measuring 0.0100 Hectare, 106, measuring 0.3550 Hectare, 109 measuring 0.0250 Hectare, 110, measuring 0.3740 Hectare and 111, measuring 0.3800 Hectare, with a total area of 3.6715 Hectares situated at Village Sewalakalan, Pargana Kendriyadun, Tehsil and District Dehradun. In the year 1982, the respondent no. 3 prepared a Master Plan with the help of Town and Planning Department and the Master Plan was published in the Official Gazette. According to the said Master Plan, the land situated in village Sewalakalan and Niranjanpur has been shown to be reserved for the category Semi Government Office purposes. According to the petitioner, the said land is surrounded by densely populated residential area, schools and other commercial buildings. The Government of Uttarakhand issued a Government Order dated 19-9-2006 whereby the land- owners have been permitted to change the use of their respective land by depositing the prescribed fee. Therefore, according to petitioner, he is entitled to get change the user of his agricultural land after depositing 50% of the prescribed fee/charges. According to the petitioner, the respondents orally declined to extend the privilege of the said Government Order to the petitioner, hence the petitioner made a representation on 19-2- 2007 with a prayer that he may be permitted to change the use of his land and he is ready to deposit the requisite fee/charges as per aforesaid Government Order. Copy of representation has been annexed as Annexure No.4. In the proposed Master Plan 2005-2025 for Dehradun Development Area, the land situated in village Sewalakalan and Niranjanpur have been shown for their offices. Copy of the proposed Master Plan has been annexed as Annexure No. 5 and the respondent nos. 1 and 2 had issued Notification under Section 4(1) 3 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 read with Section 17(1) of the said Act showing the requirement of the land including the land in dispute for the planned development and construction of residential, commercial and Government Office and published the same in the official Gazette dated 5-3-2005. Subsequently, the respondent no.1 decided not to acquire the land mentioned in the Gazette Notifiction dated 5-3- 2005 and accordingly issued Notification under Section 48 of the said Act. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent no.1 in its letter dated 12-10-2006 laid down a condition that the land use of the 24 villages will not be changed for further ten years, while no possession was taken by the Government and no compensation was paid to the landowners. The respondent no. 3 has filed its counter affidavit. On behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2 Supplementary Counter Affidavit has also been filed. Para no. 2 thereof refers to paragraph 20 of the counter affidavit wherein following averments have been made:- “2. It is submitted that the condition was also imposed in compliance with the notification dated 1-2-1989 issued by Ministry of Environment and Forests issued under Rule 5(3) of the Environment Protection Rules and also according to Section 8 of the Urban Planning and Development Act 1973 by which a master plan will be prepared for the Development area by the Development Authority. If any development area Master Plan is implemented then any such condition can be imposed for the purpose of implementation of Master Plan.” In para no. 3 of the supplementary counter affidavit it has been stated that no development of the area can be made except 4 with the permission of the competent authority under Section 14 of the Act. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record including the averments made in the writ petition, the counter affidavit filed by the respondent no.3 and the supplementary counter affidavit filed by respondent nos. 1 and 2. Annexure No. 7 is the copy of the Government letter dated 12-10-2006 sent by Principal Secretary (Avas Section) to the respondent no.3 and the District Magistrate Dehradun. In paragraph no.2, it has been mentioned that the acquisition proceedings in respect of 24 revenue villages is lifted within the ambit of Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act with the condition that land use of the disputed land will not be changed for further ten years. From a perusal of Annexure S.C.A.-1, it is obvious that the Master Plan was enforced in the area by Notification dated 29th October, 1984 and Mussoorie-Dehradun Development Authority was constituted. The disputed land was proposed to be acquired by the Government for the acquiring body M.D.D.A. Moreover, the land proposed to be acquired by the Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 5-3-2005 was released vide Annexure No. 7. I find force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no such provision in the Land Acquisition Act to impose condition that the landowners shall not change the nature of land use for ten years or that the landowners may change the user of the land by the prior permission of the Chairman/competent authority of the Mussoorie-Dehradun Development Authority (MDDA) as stated in the supplementary counter affidavit filed by the respondent nos. 1 and 2. The 5 condition no. 2 imposed by the State is without any authority of law. For the reasons and discussion aforesaid, the writ petition deserves to be allowed. Condition no.2 imposed by the State Government in the impugned Government Letter dated 12-10- 2006 (Annexure No. 7) is liable to be set aside. The writ petition is allowed. Condition prohibiting the petitioner from change of user of land for further ten years as contained in the Government Letter dated 12-10-2006 (Annexure No. 7) is set aside. However, it is provided that the petitioner shall abide by the provisions of the Urban Planning and Development Act 1973 for change of use of the land. Costs easy. All pending applications stand disposed of. ( B.S.Verma, J. ) RCP 6 7