IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 2024
IN
SLP(C) NO. 19962 OF 2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

Rakesh Kumar Aggarwal and Ors. ……..Petitioner(s)

Versus

Chief Executive Officer, NOIDA and Ors. ……Respondet(s)

APPLICATION FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT UNDER ARTICLE 129
OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURT ACTS, 1976

TO,
THE Hon’ble Chief Justice of India
And his Lordships other Companion
Judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court India
The humble petition of the petitioners above named

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the petitioner herein seeks indulgence of this Hon’ble
Court to exercise its powers vested under Article 129 of the
Constitution of India and under section 12 of the Contempt
of Court Acts, 1971 for intentional and willful disobedience
and violation by the alleged contemnor of order dated
22.09.2023 passed by the bench comprising Hon’ble Mr.
Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hon’ble Mr. Justice
Sudhansu Dhulia in SLP(C) No. 19962 of 2023. The
Petitioner respectfully submits that there has been a clear
violation by the alleged contemnor of the aforesaid order
which in every clear terms had ordered that “In the
meantime, Status quo with respect to posting, as it
exists today, shall be maintained by the parties.”
2. The brief facts leading to the filing of this instant application
are set out within a narrow compass as under:

FACTS ON RECORD
The applicant is the owner of piece of land, measuring 1.48
hectares (14800sq.mt.) in Khasra No.276 situated in
District- Gautam Buddh Nagar. The applicant was not the
original tenure holder, but had purchased the land through
three registered sale deeds dated 09.01.1990, 10.01.1990
and 06.04.1990. The sale deeds contain no site plan
 indicaling the exact location of Khasra No.276, purchased
by the applicant.
The State Government had issued preliminary Notification
dated 30th November, 1989 under Section 4(1) of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'),
proposing to acquire 91-11-0 bighas (57.218 acres) of land
comprising a large number of khasras in Village-Bhagel
Begumpur, Pargana Dadri, District Ghaziabad (now
Gautambudh Nagar) at the instance of the New Okhla
Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter, to be referred
as “Noida Authority”) herein. This was followed by a final
Notification dated 16th June, 1990 issued under Section
6(1) of Act. The State Government also exercised powers
under Sections 17(1) and (4) of the Act and dispensed with
inquiry under Section 5A of the Act.
a. It is humbly submitted that the Noida Authority has
unauthorizedly acquired land belonging to Rakesh Kumar
Aggarwal and Ors. That Noida Authority is the contempt
petitioner which had acquired a land measuring
14800sq.mt. in November, 1989 following the notification
issued by the State government without paying or depositing
any compensation amount in pursuance of the notification
u/s 4 of Land Acquisition Act in favor of the landowners.
b. Upon the inception of the unauthorized and malicious
acquisition proceeding actions by the Noida Authority, the
landowners in June of 1990 filed Writ Petition no.
21643/1990 before the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court
challenging said acquisition proceedings. The Hon’ble High
Court granted status quo in favour of the landowners with
regard to the possession of the land in question measuring
14800sq.mt., 5 bigha 17 biswa (approx.) 3-acre land.
c. That in January of 2015, the Noida Authority unwarrantedly
constructed the City Bus Terminal upon the land in
question in sheer disregard and violation of the Hon’ble
Allahabad High Court stay order granting status quo to the
land in question deeming the construction by the Authority
unauthorized, and illegal.
d. The Hon’ble High Court decided the Writ Petition No. of the
petitioner thereby directing Noida Authority to assess & determine the
compensation amount twice the market rate along with the provisions
of Land Acquisition Act & Rehabilitation Act, 2013 and pay the
compensation amount within 3 months from the date of order
otherwise demolish the bus terminal & restore the land to the
petitioner. Following is the details NOIDA has admitted in the
judgement dated 19.12.2016 of the Hon’ble High Court:

“A supplementary counter Affidavit was filed by NOIDA, stating that

land in question is laying vacant. Thereafter without leave of Court,
NOIDA started construction of City Bus Terminal in January, 2015
despite protest raised by petitioners and this fact was reiterated in 3 rd
supplementary counter affidavit filed by NOIDA. Petitioners filed
Contempt Petition no.2759 of 2015 in which notices were issued and
matter is pending.”- (Page 3, Para 9)

“It is in these peculiar facts and circumstances and looking to the facts
that though respondents are clearly guilty of going ahead with
constructions over a land which was not legally acquired and
acquisition notification was already set aside by Supreme Court vide
judgement dated 23rd August, 2011, in respect of some of the tenure
holders whose land was also acquired under same acquisition
notifications, therefore, respondents should have been careful enough
not to create/change nature of property till pending writ petitions are
decided, but they went ahead and changed nature of land in dispute
ignoring completely illegality they have already committed and also
suffered in some cases involving same dispute and acquisition
notifications. This act on the part of respondents needs to be
deprecated. We have no hesitation in holding that authority concerned
who permitted it, went to the extent of undertaking illegal construction
putting huge public exchequer at risk. ”- (Page 8, Para 23)

“Having said so still we find that it would be very harsh on the part of
this Court to get entire constructions demolished and restore possession
of disputed land of petitioners.”- (Page 9, Para 24)

“In the facts and circumstances, we mould relief and allow both these
writ petitions in following manner;

(i) Acquisition notifications dated 30th November, 1989 and 16th

June,1990 in so far as relate to petitioners' land are hereby quashed,
since dispensation of inquiry under Section 5A by invocation of urgency
under Section 17 is patently illegal as held in judgement of Supreme
Court in Daya Ram Tyagi and others (supra).
 (ii). Respondents shall determine compensation of disputed land at
twice market value which would be determined in accordance with
provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and pay the
same to petitioners within three months from the date of judgment,
failing which they shall restore possession of disputed land to
petitioners by removing constructions, if any, raised thereon.

(iii). Petitioners shall also be entitled to cost which we quantify to

Rs.5,00,000/ in each set of writ petition.”- (Page 9, Para 25)
e. On 25.03.2017, New Okhla Industrial Development
Authority (NOIDA) filed review application. On 21.02.2018,
the review application was dismissed. A Special Leave
Petition was filed before Hon'ble Apex Court against the
judgment and order dated 19.12.2016 and order passed on
the review application dated 21.02.2018. The said SLP was
dismissed on 05.03.2019.