AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-
“10.1That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record of the case pertaining to the issuance of the impugned memo.
10.2That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s), quashing the impugned memo/order dated 15.06.2026 (ANNEXURE P-1) and 30.07.2026 (ANNEXURE P-2) declaring the same to be illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction.
10.3That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s), to provide the order dated 05.08.2026 and further respondent no.2 to quashing the order dated 05.08.2026 granting the permission to review the order dated 08.07.2026 passed by the respondent no.3 and grant any other relief, including the cost of this petition, as it appears. to be fit and appropriate to this Hon'ble Court.”
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the memos/letters dated 15.06.2026 and 30.07.2026, whereby restrictions were imposed on transactions and diversion of land in the villages proposed to be affected by the goods railway track, as well as the order dated 05.08.2026. It is further submitted that, upon obtaining permission for review from respondent No. 2, respondent No. 3 reviewed its earlier order and passed a subsequent order dated 10.08.2026, whereby the earlier order concerning diversion of land was reversed. Learned counsel further submits that the respondent authorities have subsequently issued a fresh memo/letter dated 12.10.2026, whereby the restrictions imposed on the sale, transfer and diversion of land have been lifted. In view of these subsequent developments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to file an appropriate application for diversion of land before the competent authority and prays that the same be considered in accordance with law, keeping in view the subsequent order passed by the concerned authority.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner may approach the competent authority by filing an appropriate application for diversion of land, which shall be considered in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations. It is further submitted that, in view of the subsequent memo/letter dated 12.10.2026, the restrictions imposed on the sale, transfer and diversion of land have already been lifted. Therefore, no further orders are required to be passed in the present writ petition.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, it appears that, in view of the subsequent memo/letter dated 12.10.2026, the restrictions imposed on the sale, transfer and diversion of land have been lifted by the concerned authority. In these circumstances, the petitioner is at liberty to file an appropriate application for diversion of land before the competent authority, which shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.