HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 34340 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-respondents. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred praying inter alia for the following relief: "I) Issue a writ order or direction nature of mandamus commanding and directing the competent respondent authorities to provide the proper compensation to the petitioners for their land which was taken by the irrigation department for constructed a dam. II) Issue a writ order or direction nature of mandamus commanding and directing the competent respondent authorities to consider and decide the representation moved by the petitioners within the stipulated time period." 3. At the very outset, Shri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents, has raised a preliminary objection qua the maintainability of the writ petition, primarily on the ground that there already exists a PWD road, which fact has also been acknowledged by the revenue authorities in their report dated 17.05.2025 relied upon by the petitioners. It is further submitted that a stale and dead Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shishir Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ram Bharat And 11 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) claim cannot be revived under writ jurisdiction. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Syed Maqbool Ali vs. State of U.P. and Another, (2011) 4 SCR 238, as well as the judgment of this Court in Writ - C No. 12698 of 2025 (Dalip Singh and 4 Others vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others). He further submits 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. 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 District Level 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 sand ensure that the proceeding shall be finalised expeditiously, preferably within twelve weeks, thereafter. September 26, 2025 NLY WRIC No. 34340 of 2025 2 (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad