The Allahabad High Court is reviewing Uttar Pradesh’s recent ordinance, UP Ordinance No.5 of 2024, which restricts the conversion of Nazul lands into freehold properties, prioritizing state ownership for development projects.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Prayagraj: Recently, The Allahabad High Court has become involved in a contentious matter concerning the Uttar Pradesh (UP) Government‘s latest ordinance. In response to a writ petition challenging the recent ordinance, UP Ordinance No.5 of 2024, which brings substantial alterations to the Nazul land policy, the court has directed the state government counsel to obtain instructions.
“Nazul lands” are government-owned properties like land or buildings, officially recorded as such. This includes any property leased, licensed, or occupied under government rules.
The new ordinance, UP Ordinance No.5 of 2024, introduces strict regulations aimed at preventing the conversion of Nazul lands into freehold properties for private individuals or entities after its enactment. Additionally, it explicitly prohibits the extension of lease agreements for Nazul lands beyond their initial lease period. The primary objective of these provisions is to ensure that upon the expiration of a lease, ownership of the land automatically reverts to the state. This measure is intended to tackle the pressing issue of land scarcity and ensure that land remains available for crucial developmental projects.
ALSO READ: Rajasthan High Court Facilitates Fair Land Exchange for Farmer
Clause (3) of Section 3 of the Ordinance nullifies any ongoing proceedings or applications aiming to convert Nazul Land into freehold status, deeming them lapsed or rejected. Furthermore, any funds deposited along with such applications will be refunded with interest, matching the Marginal Cost of Funds-Based Lending Rate (MCLR) of the State Bank of India, from the date of deposit.
This ordinance was initiated by Dr. Ashok Tahiliani, who filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court. The division bench, comprising Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Surendra Singh-I, took up the matter.
During the hearing, Dr. Tahiliani’s senior counsel, Rahul Sripat, argued the urgency of the case, emphasizing:
“the present case was urgent as there was no imminent threat of demolition.”
In response, the state government’s representation, led by Chief Standing Counsel Kunal Ravi Singh and Standing Counsel Nimai Das, clarified the current status of enforcement actions. They assured the court:
“as on date, no steps had been taken to evict the petitioner or to demolish any construction of the petitioner as on date.”
ALSO READ: Telangana High Court: Responds to Alleged Rs. 25,000-Crore ‘Land Scam’ Petition
The bench has scheduled the next hearing for April 5, 2024.