JUDGMENT Hon’ble Amitava Lala, A.C.J.—This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners saying that the petitioners are the inhabitants of the village in a Gaon Sabha in the District Allahabad and they are representing all the people of the concerned village/Gaon Sabha. Neither the Gaon Sabha has made any writ petition nor upon making it a party and service thereof is appearing before us to make submissions in respect of grievance of the petitioners in question by way of this public interest litigation. 2. Petitioners’ whole contention is that the Gata No. 1489-Kha situated at Village Mauaima, Gram Sabha Mauaima, Pargana and Tehsil Soraon, District Allahabad, has been converted to the urban residential area under the scheme ‘Man-Kanshi Ram Ji Shahari Garib Awas Yojna’. Two prayers are made. First prayer is about acquisition of land and second prayer is with respect to construction of the house. 3. Sri Ramanand Pandey, learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of instructions, which have been filed before this Court, has contended before us that so far as acquisition of the land is concerned, it has already been completed, State has resumed the land under Section 117 (6) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. The land was shown as ‘banzar’ land i.e. land for Gaon Sabha and after resumption now in the revenue record it has been shown as the land of the aforesaid Yojna. At no point of time, the Gaon Sabha opposed such resumption or recording their name in the record nor they have raised any grievance before any Court of law. 4. Belatedly, the Gaon Sabha counsel has appeared and contended before us that the dispute with regard to the land in question is before the Civil Court but as per paragraph-18 of the writ petition the suit is with regard to Gata No. 4878 and not with regard to Gata No. 1489 Kha, therefore, we cannot express our view in respect of the land in question. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners has contended before us that in their representation, the Pradhan is also a signatory. According to us, the Pradhan ‘as individual’ become signatory alongwith others. It cannot improve the position. Further it cannot be presupposed that the Pradhan or Gram Pradhan had any objection from the very beginning till now. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners has contended before us that in their representation, the Pradhan is also a signatory. According to us, the Pradhan ‘as individual’ become signatory alongwith others. It cannot improve the position. Further it cannot be presupposed that the Pradhan or Gram Pradhan had any objection from the very beginning till now. Had it been so, the resolution could have been taken in the Gaon Sabha itself and it would have been forwarded to the District Magistrate for the purpose of giving effect thereto. Therefore, we do not find any genuine cause in the submission of the petitioners. 6. The only question which, according to us, is considerable that whether the project made for the poor people of the urban area can be done in rural area governed by the concerned Gram Panchayat or not. 7. Against this background, learned Standing Counsel has shown to us the Government Order dated July 24, 2008 saying that various places of the urban area as well as ‘other lands’ can be taken into account in respect to the scheme in question. Accordingly, other lands include any other land whether the same is in urban area or rural area. However, we are not convinced very much to observe the same but it is correct to say ‘other lands’ are definitely residuary in nature. Therefore, it is quite open that all the lands other than the specified land can be taken for the purpose of residential development of the poorer sections of the people of urban area. We cannot also exclude the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel to that extent. 8. That apart, the development of the poorer sections of the urban people will have to be considered from the practical point of view. Always it may not be feasible to get land within the urban area but in the outskirts. If we take further practical point of view, we shall be able to see many of the cities and/or towns are surrounded by the villages under the control and supervision of Gaon Sabha. Having so, we cannot apply any straight jacket formula that other than the land in the urbanized area no land can be taken for the poorer section of the people of urban area. Having so, we cannot apply any straight jacket formula that other than the land in the urbanized area no land can be taken for the poorer section of the people of urban area. Poorer section of the people in the urban area can be given accommodation in the outer sides of the cities and/or towns, so that they can live within their means. There is every possibility to get surplus land in the rural places nearby or surrounding city or town unlike the city or town itself. Therefore, the action on the part of the State cannot be said to be against public policy. 9. Hence, in totality the writ petition cannot be allowed. Thus, it is dismissed, however, without imposing any cost. Hon’ble Shabihul Hasnain, J.—I agree. ————