Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:48784-DB Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 43297 of 2024 Petitioner :- Sudha Sisodia Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rishi Kant Rai,Tej Bahadur Rai Counsel for Respondent :- Shivam Yadav,Anjali Upadhya,C.S.C. Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. Admittedly, the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing Writ-C No. 51876 of 2017 for a direction to the respondent, Development Authority, to pay 64.70% as additional compensation and 10% abadi land to her in terms of Full Bench decision of this Court in Gajraj & Ors vs. State of U.P. and others, 2011 (11) ADJ 1. The said writ petition was disposed of with direction to the Chief Executive Officer, Greater NOIDA to examine the claim and take decision in accordance with law. Pursuant thereto, an order came to be passed on 6 March 2018 by Chief Executive Officer, Greater NOIDA observing that the Development Authority in its 104th Board Meeting dated 14.03.2016 had submitted a proposal to the Government for allotment of 10% developed land to the affected persons and the matter was pending before the State Government. Consequently, further action in the matter would be taken after the decision of the State Government. The order also notes that additional compensation of 64.70% had been duly paid to the petitioner. 2. The petitioner has now again approached this Court for a direction to the respondents to decide her representation dated 21.11.2024 in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ramesh Chandra Sharma & others vs. State of U.P. & others, reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 162. 3. Shri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel appearing for Greater NOIDA submits that the proposal of the Greater NOIDA was turned down by the State Government. The same was approved by the Supreme Court in case of Khatoon vs. State of U.P. & others, 2018 (14) SCC 346. He submits that in terms of judgment of Full Bench only those persons who had challenged the acquisition are entitled for 10% developed land. However, he does not dispute that 6% developed land is to be given even to those persons who have not challenged the acquisition proceedings subject to fulfillment of other conditions. He, therefore, very fairly submits that the respondent-Authority would decide the representation of the petitioner. 4. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of with direction to respondent No. 2 to take decision on the representation of the petitioner dated 21.11.2024 within six weeks from the date of communication of the instant order along with photocopy of the representation. Order Date :- 5.4.2025 Mukesh Kr. (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- MUKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad