Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13647 (ALL)

AMIT GUPTA AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHRES

WRIC/34240/2013 · 2025-09-18

Anish Kumar Gupta, Mahesh Chandra Tripathi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 34240 of 2013 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; Shri F.A. Ansari, learned Standing Counsel for State respondents and Shri S.C. Dwivedi, learned counsel for Agra Development Authority (in short "Authority"). 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for quashing the impugned notification dated 11.05.2012 under Section 6 (1)/ 16 of Land Acquisition Act issued by Special Secretary, U.P. Shasan, Awas and Shahari Niyojan. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the impugned notification has already been quashed by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 27.09.2019 in Writ-C No.68915 of 2014 (Ram Nivas v. State of U.P. & Ors.). The judgment and order dated 27.09.2019 has also been affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 16.3.2021 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s).6737 of 2020 (Agra Development Authority v. Ram Nivas & Ors.). As such, it is submitted that being on similar footing, the instant writ petition is also liable to be allowed. 4. So far as factual and legal aspect is concerned, the same could not be disputed by learned counsel for the respondents. 5. Accordingly, the instant writ petition also stands allowed in terms of Ram Nivas (Supra). September 19, 2025 SP/ Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Bharat Bhushan Paul Counsel for Respondent(s) : M.C. Chaturvedi (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Amit Gupta And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Othres .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- SURYA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad