WRIC/16119/2026 of PARAM JYOTI AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 16119 of 2026 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-respondent and Sri Sudhir Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 3. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred praying inter alia for the following relief: "1. Issue a writ order or direction in the Nature of mandamus direct the respondent no. 2 and 3 to pay payment of compensation of their land in question bearing Gata no. 1368 Ga, 1368 Chh, and 1368 Jh (old Gata no. 757)total rakba 2 Beegha situated at Village-Deokali, Tehsil Saidpur, District Ghazipur, which was illegally encroached by the National Highway Authority of India with interest without any delay in lieu of their unacquired land. 2. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent authority not to release the compensation of the Gata no. 756 and 760 in favor of the beneficiary during the pendency of the claim of the petitioner. 3. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus direct the respondents authority to take appropriate decision upon the application of the petitioner dated 15.07.2025, with in reasonable time-frame as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court." Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Nandini Mishra, Navin Singh, Ranjana Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Param Jyoti And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of Up And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 3. At the very outset, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel informed to the Court that for redressal of grievance of tenure holders, claiming certain right/title over their land, the State Government had issued detailed Government Order dated 12.05.2016, which provides that in case the claimant files claim supported with requisite documents, the same would be considered by the District Level Committee for ensuring adequate compensation in the light of Act 2013. He submits that once the efficacious remedy is available to the petitioners, the matter should be relegated to the District Level Committee, which may examine the claim of petitioners within a reasonable time and submit its report to the Chairman/District Magistrate, who may accord adequate compensation accordingly. 4. The position of law is well-established that in view of Article 300A and 31A of the Constitution of India, the owner of land can be divested only in accordance with law after appropriately compensating, if such land is required by the State for public purpose. Since, such power of eminent domain is not in dispute, we need not advert the matter at this stage in view of Government Order dated 12.05.2016. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the relief prayed in the instant matter, we dispose of the instant petition with liberty to the petitioners to make fresh representation along with true attested copy of the instant order before Committee constituted under the Government Order dated 12.05.2016 within two weeks. In the event, such representation is made, the District Level Committee shall consider the claim of the petitioners and ensure that the proceeding shall be finalized expeditiously, preferably within twelve weeks, thereafter. May 6, 2026 Sumit S WRIC No. 16119 of 2026 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.)   (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad