Allahabad HC Issues Notice On Validity Of UP Ordinance Restricting Nazul Land Policies, Bars Any Coercive Measures

Challenges were raised against ordinance No. 5 of 2024. An ordinance dated March 07,2024 changing in its Nazul land policy was passed by the UP Government.

Nazul means any land or building that is the property of the government. It also includes all properties in respect of which lease, licence or occupancy has been granted under any law as the government may declare by notification.

The ordinance prescribes that there will be no freehold of such land and no extension of lease after the lease period ends. This move was intended to ensure that Nazul lands, once the lease period expires, are vested in the State.

A Division Bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Surendra Singh-I said, “Since, the validity of the Ordinance is in issue, let notice be issued to the learned Advocate General.”

Senior Advocate A.M. Singhvi appeared for the Petitioners and Chief Standing Counsel Kunal Ravi Singh appeared for the State-respondents.

The Petitioners contended the lack of urgency in promulgating the ordinance, as indicated by its timing. It was further contended that the purpose of the ordinance seems to nullify judicial pronouncements rather than addressing any defects.

They highlighted absence of segregation to differentiate between different status of applicants before nullifying rights. Concerns about the repeal of the Government Grants Act, 1895, and its impact on rights under the Transfer of Property Act were also put forward.

The Counsel representing the State, stated that the government does not currently intend to take coercive measures against the petitioners. A communication from the District Magistrate clarified that a survey proposed was for updating records and not for eviction or demolition of existing constructions.

The Court issued notice to the Advocate General, granting all respondents four weeks to file a counter affidavit and the petitioners two weeks thereafter to file a rejoinder affidavit.

The Court added, “In view of the stand taken by the State, it is provided, no coercive measures may be adopted against the petitioners, except with leave of the Court.”

Cause Title: Hemant Gupta & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors.

Appearance:

Petitioners: Senior Advocate A.M. Singhvi, (through V.C.) assisted by Advocate Tarun Agarwal

Respondents: Chief Standing Counsel Kunal Ravi Singh

Click here to read/download Order