HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 34560 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Abhishek Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners; Sri Akhileshwar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and Sri Narendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the Gorakhpur Development Authority. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for a mandamus commanding the respondent nos. 1 to 3 to consider the entire acquisition in the light of the compromise/settlement dated 22.4.2017 in the interest of justice. With a further prayer for a mandamus restraining the respondent authorities from demolition proceedings of the houses and construction made over the acquired land or to maintain status quo over the land in dispute which belongs to the petitioners during pendency of the present writ petition. 3. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon the order dated 13.5.2025 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ-C No. 5706 of 2025 (Brijlal and another v. State of U.P. and 4 others). He submits that in the said case, the Division Bench had also taken into consideration the earlier settlement entered between the farmers and the Authority and accordingly the direction was issued to decide the representation after due notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. As such, it is sought to be contended that the present matter is squarely covered by the aforesaid order and the writ petition is liable to be disposed of in the light of Brijlal (supra). Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Narendra Pratap Singh Kamar Ali And 14 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 4. So far as the factual aspect of the matter, learned counsel for the GDA fairly states that at present, he is not in a position to make a statement as to whether the Authority is still inclined to decide the representation in the light of the earlier purported settlement. However, in case the matter is relegated to the competent authority, definitely, representation of the petitioners would be considered strictly in accordance with law. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without adverting on merits of the issue, as the Division Bench has already relegated the matter in Brijlal (supra) to the Development Authority to take recourse in accordance with law. In the interest of justice, in case the petitioners file a detailed representation ventilating their grievances within a week's time from today before the Vice Chairman, Gorakhpur Development Authority, we hope and trust that the said representation will be decided strictly in accordance with law but certainly after due notice and opportunity to the petitioners, expeditiously and preferably within four weeks thereafter. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. October 6, 2025 A.K.Srivastava WRIC No. 34560 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad