HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 3429 of 2019 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Anupam Kulshrestha, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Shatakshi Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents. 2. The instant writ petition is preferred, inter-alia, for the following relief:- a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI quashing the impugned order dated 13.12.2018, communicated to the petitioner vide order dated 14.12.2018, passed by the Executive Engineer, Nirman Khand-I, Public Works Department, Mathura, the respondent no. 2 (Annexure No. 16 to this writ petition); b) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the respondents pay compensation of the land, solitium along with interest, in accordance with the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013 and to determine the compensation of land of plot no. 10 are 426.31 square meters situated in Village - Mathura Khadar, Tehsil & District - Mathura; c) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the respondents to determine and pay compensation to the petitioner towards the improvement on the land in dispute, including boundary wall of plot nos. 10 and 11, which has been demolished by the respondents while utilizing the plot nos. 10 and 11 for the construction of approach road to connect the new bridge on Yamuna river as well as Shiv Temple situated in plot no. 10; Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anupam Kulshreshtha Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Dr. Satya Prakash Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: (i) The petitioner is recorded as a bhumidhar with transferable rights over plot no. 10, admeasuring 0.1380 hectare, and plot no. 11, admeasuring 0.1620 hectare, situated in Mauza Mathura Khadar, Tehsil and District Mathura. (ii) It is stated that the petitioner purchased plot no. 10 by means of a registered sale deed dated 22.08.1994 executed by the recorded tenure holder, namely, Mool Chand s/o Puran. The said sale deed is registered in Book No. 1, Zild No. 32, at pages 75 to 110, Serial No. 750. Plot no. 11 was subsequently purchased by the petitioner from the recorded tenure holder, namely, Har Chand s/o Ram Ratan, by a registered sale deed dated 02.11.1996, recorded in Book No. 1, Zild No. 326, Serial No. 4466. It further transpires from the record that the State Government undertook construction of a new bridge over river Yamuna near old Chungi on State Highway No. 33 (Bharatpur-Pilibhit State Highway), for which the aforesaid plots were required. The land in question was subsequently transferred to respondent no. 2 on 10.09.2013. However, the claim of the petitioner for compensation was denied on account of pendency of a civil dispute arising from an agreement to sell allegedly executed by the original tenure holder in favour of a third party. 4. Sri Anupam Kulshrestha, learned Senior Advocate, submits that the civil suit, which was pending at the relevant time, has since been dismissed by judgment and order dated 01.02.2023, against which an appeal has been preferred. He further submits that it is an admitted position that a registered sale deed exists in favour of the petitioner, which has neither been cancelled nor stayed by any competent court. It is further contended that although proceedings were initiated by a person claiming under an agreement to sell, the land in question has already been utilized by the State and, therefore, stands vested in the State free from all encumbrances. The petitioner, being the recorded and lawful owner, had also granted a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for utilization of the land. Hence, there exists no legal impediment in releasing compensation in favour of the petitioner. 5. Per contra, Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, submits that at the time of passing of the impugned order in the WRIC No. 3429 of 2019 2 year 2018, the Authority had rightly withheld payment of compensation on account of pendency of the civil dispute. He very fairly submits that, inasmuch as the petitioner, by way of a supplementary affidavit, has brought on record the judgment and order passed by the competent Civil Court, there appears to be no impediment for the authority to consider the petitioner's claim for release of compensation. He further submits that the said aspect may appropriately be examined by the District Level Committee constituted under the Government Order dated 12.05.2016. 6. Having considered the rival submissions and perused the record, this Court finds that the impugned order dated 13.12.2018, as communicated on 14.12.2018, does not suffer from any illegality at the time it was passed, inasmuch as the same was based on the pendency of the civil suit. However, it is not disputed that the suit for specific performance being O.S. No. 291 of 1996 has since been decided by judgment and order dated 01.02.2023. In view of the changed circumstances, this Court does not find any subsisting impediment to the claim of the petitioner for compensation, nor any basis to deny his status as the rightful owner and claimant. 7. Accordingly, in light of the aforesaid developments, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is relegated to the District Level Committee constituted under Government Order dated 12.05.2016, which shall examine the claim of the petitioner and submit its report in accordance with law to the Chairman, i.e., the District Magistrate, who shall pass an appropriate order. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed expeditiously, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. March 23, 2026 gp WRIC No. 3429 of 2019 3 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- GANESH PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad