Part-5-All good things come to an end in the Supreme Court of India-Nazul Free Hold Case of U.P.

Part-5-All good things come to an end in the Supreme Court of India-Nazul Free Hold Case of U.P.
Kanpur-16th -June-2009
For years during my Research on various topics including the Town Planning Laws of India, I have noted that it is on rare occasions possible for the general public of India to get a few orders from the High Courts, which go a long way in addressing the problems of the teeming masses but All such good things come to an end in the Supreme Court of India, which more often than not stays the Order of the High Court arbitrarily then keeps on sitting on the Petition for years, often decades altogether, resulting in denial of the Relief to the general public, which the High Court took pains to provide. I shall be discussing a few cases periodically, Some cases I am detailing below:-

1. The State of U.P was taking very heavy amount as premium for free hold of Nazul Land given on lease earlier while in the case of Free hold of plots given on lease by the Development Authorities and Awas Vikas Parishad, only a fraction was being charged .In a Land mark Judgment,dated-30-03-2006, the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc Writ Petition No.3341 of 1999 in the matter of Harish Tandon V/s State of U.P, found this to be discriminatory and in violation of Article 14. This Judgment would have benefited Lakhs of holders of Nazul leases.
2. However, as usual, before the general public could reap the benefit of the judgment of the High Court, the Supreme Court, aghast at the relief provided to the general public i.e. the insignificant common man, stayed the order and thereafter it has been sitting on the file for about three years. On top of it had taken 7 years in the Allahabad High Court and before that a considerable time in fighting before the Authorities. The Order of the Supreme Court reads:-ITEM NO.30 COURT NO.3 SECTION XI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).17245/2006 (From the judgement and order dated 30/03/2006 in CMWP No. 3341/1999 of The HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD) STATE OF U.P. & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS HARISH TANDON Respondent(s) (With appln(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and with prayer for interim relief and office report) Date: 03/11/2006 This Petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. AGRAWAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P. NAOLEKAR For Petitioner(s) Mr. Harish N. Salve, Sr. Adv. Dr. R.G. Padia, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.W.A. Qadri, Adv. Mr. Kamlendra Mishra,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Dubey, Adv. Mr. Fuzail Khan, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Dinesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ashish Mohan, Adv. Mr. K.K. Mohan,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. Until further orders, status quo as it exists today shall be maintained. (Rajesh Dham) (Madhu Saxena) Court Master Court Master
3. Till today, the case is pending and it is such a case in which it is most likely that the private party may have already reaped the benefit of the High Court Judgment and even otherwise may not even file a reply so the Case will meet a slow death in the Supreme Court and thus the benefit given to the common man by the Allahabad High Court has been denied to the public by the arbitrary and Authoritarian stay order of the Supreme court and it is more than possible that it will be denied forever because of the negotiating powers of the State Government. Therefore once the Supreme Court stays an order of the High Court of such a great public importance, it ought to and it should decide the case in maximum six months even if the respondents are served or not after all they do have the brains to decide the case even in absence of the reply or do they lack the brains and have to depend on the replies and arguments of advocates in which case the public will always loose as the State can afford to hire the most expensive Advocates at public cost and that too mostly to serve their egos and no public interest is involved in challenging the orders of the High Court.
4. This article will be continued regarding other cases, where the Public interest benefic Judgments passed by the High Courts have come to an end in the Supreme Court of India and have been pending since ages.
Robby Sharma
865, Block-B, Panki Kanpur-208020
email—sharmarobby@hotmail.com
Mob-91-9415438326;9235844258.

Tags- Supreme Court of India, All good things come to an End, Nazul Land Free hold case in U.P.

Part-4-All good things come to an end in the Supreme Court of India-Housing Societies Stamp duty-Case.

Part-4-All good things come to an end in the Supreme Court of India-Housing Societies Stamp duty-Case.
Kanpur-30th -May-2009
For years during my Research on various topics including the Town Planning Laws of India, I have noted that it is on rare occasions possible for the general public of India to get a few orders from the High Courts, which go a long way in addressing the problems of the teeming masses but All such good things come to an end in the Supreme Court of India, which more often than not stays the Order of the High Court arbitrarily then keeps on sitting on the Petition for years, often decades altogether, resulting in denial of the Relief to the general public, which the High Court took pains to provide. I shall be discussing a few cases periodically, Some cases I am detailing below:-

1. In a Land mark Judgment,dated-October-14-2004, the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc Writ Petition No.13560 of 2003, in the matter of Rail Vihar Kalyan Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd and seven other connected petitions ruled that Once a Housing Society had got the Sale/lease deed executed in its favor, the State Government could not force its members to get individual deeds executed in their names as they themselves were the owners of the Society as such they could not be forced to get registered separately portions allotted to them individually, as they themselves were their owners and there was no need for payment of any further Stamp duty by individual members.
2. However, as usual, before the general public could reap the benefit of the judgment of the High Court, the Supreme Court, aghast at the relief provided to the general public i.e. the insignificant common man, stayed the order and thereafter it has been sitting on the file for five years. After completion of hearing, one of the Judges opted out of the case, strangely requiring rehearing by another Bench. The hearing was completed on 15th of October-2008 and the Supreme Court passed the following order “


“ITEM NO.101(Part-heard) COURT NO.8 SECTION XI
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 2938 OF 2005
STATE OF U.P. & ANR. Appellant (s)

VERSUS
ARMY WELFARE HOUSING ORGANISATION & ORS. Respondent(s)
(With office report )
WITH
C.A. No.2939/2005 (with office report),
C.A.No.2941/2005 (with office report),
C.A.No.2942/2005 (with office report),
C.A.No.2943/2005 (with office report),
C.A.No.2945/2005
(with appln.(s) for permission to place additional documents on record and with
prayer for interim relief and office report),
C.A.No.2944/2005 (with office report),
C.A.No.3607/2006
(with appln.(s) for impleadment as party respondent and with office report),
C.A.No.3605/2006
C.A.No.3621/2006
C.A.No.3618/2006
C.A.No.3608/2006
C.A.No.3604/2006
(With appln.(s) for permission to place additional documents on record and with
ofice report)
C.A. No.3606/2006 (With office report)
C.A. No.3603/2006,
Date: 15/10/2008 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DALVEER BHANDARI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARJIT SINGH BEDI

Mr. P.C. Agrawala, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents commenced his arguments at 10.30 a.m. and concluded at 10.45 a.m.

C.A.Nos.2941 of 2005 & 3618 of 2006

Mr. Neeraj Kumar Jain, learned counsel appearing for the respondents commenced his arguments at 10.45 a.m. and concluded at 10.50 a.m.
C.A.Nos. 2939, 2942 of 2005, 3605, 3607/2006

Mr. Mahendra Anand, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents commenced his arguments at 10.55 a.m. and concluded at 11.05 a.m.
I.A. No. 3 in C.A. 3607 of 2006:

None is present for the applicant. The application for
impleadment is dismissed.
I.A. No. 3 in C.A. No. 3625 of 2006:
None is present for the applicant. The application for
intervention is dismissed.

Judgment reserved in all the appeals.

Learned counsel appearing for the respective parties are permitted to file written submissions in their respective appeals within one week from today.
Transfer Petition Nos. 148, 149 & 150/2006
The Transfer Petitions be listed after the
pronouncement of judgment in the appeals.
(Pardeep Kumar) (Neeru Bala Vij)
Court Master Court Master”
3. Till today, the Judgment has not been pronounced and the State of U.P continues to Extort Crores of Rupees, from the general public Therefore the benefit given to the common man by the Allahabad High Court has been denied to the public by the arbitrary and Authoritarian stay order of the Supreme court and thereafter its reluctance to pass the final order may be because of the negotiating powers of the State Government.
4. This article will be continued regarding other cases, where the Public interest benefic Judgments passed by the High Courts have come to an end in the Supreme Court of India and have been pending since ages.
Robby Sharma
865, Block-B, Panki Kanpur-208020
email—sharmarobby@hotmail.com
Mob-91-9415438326;9235844258.

Tags- Supreme Court of India, All good things come to an End, Stamp duty in case of Housing Societies,