JUDGMENT By the Court.—Heard learned counsel for parties. 2. Recovery notice dated 6.2.2006 issued by Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar, Lucknow pursuant to recovery certificate issued by Commissioner for recovering of Rs. 24.12. crores alongwith recovery charges has been challenged in the present writ petition on the ground that the aforesaid proceedings are patently illegal and without jurisdiction inasmuch as no such recovery can be made as arrears of land revenue. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and dealing in manufacturing and sale of three wheelers with a unit at Sarojini Nagar, Lucknow. 4. There was a scheme introduced by Government of India, Ministry of Industry namely ‘Own Your House’ for employees of public sector undertakings vide letter dated 26th September, 1978 and required Central Public Sector undertakings to implement the same under the guidelines of 20 Point Programme. 5. In pursuance to the aforesaid scheme and in order to implement the same, petitioner requested State Government to allot 70 Bighas of land where against petitioner was allotted 24 Bigha, 13 Biswa and 16 Biswani of land comprising of Khasra No. 1655 (New No. 1308) (area 17-6-0-0 in village Gahru and Khasra No. 1 (area 7-7-16-0) in village Meeranpur, Pinwa in Pargana-Bijnore, Tahsil & District-Lucknow. 6. The aforesaid land was allotted out the ceiling land owned and possessed by State Government. Initially, market price of aforesaid land was determined at the rate of 4,000/- per bigha and petitioner was communicated the same for payment. Petitioner made payment of Rs. 4,55,067/- to District Magistrate in view of Government Order dated 1/3.8.2000 whereby District Magistrate was directed to execute lease deed in favour of petitioner after considering market price of allotted land at Rs. 4,000/- per Bigha. 7. Subsequently, respondent returned the cheque of Rs. 4,55,067/- sent by petitioner and initiated recovery proceedings holding that the market value of land is much higher. 8. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that this is contractual matter and the amount sought to be recovered is allegedly consideration for land allotted to petitioner in respect of documents of lease of title are yet to be executed. The aforesaid amount cannot be recovered as arrears of land revenue. 9. 8. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that this is contractual matter and the amount sought to be recovered is allegedly consideration for land allotted to petitioner in respect of documents of lease of title are yet to be executed. The aforesaid amount cannot be recovered as arrears of land revenue. 9. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents in para 41 they have stated that recovery has been issued in accordance with rules and regulations but no statutory provision has been specified therein. 10. When confronted, learned counsel for respondent could not show any provision under which the amount in question can be recovered as “arrears of revenue”. 11. In view thereof amount sought to be recovered as arrears of land revenue is patently illegal. Writ petition is accordingly allowed. Recovery notice dated 6.2.2006 issued by the respondents is hereby quashed. 12. However, we make it clear that this judgement shall not preclude the parties to settle their matter and respondent shall also not be precluded to avail such remedy as permissible in law for recovery of any amount, if recoverable or due upon petitioner.