Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 151152 (ALL)

SMT. LALITA TIWARI v. U.O.I. THRU. THE SECY. MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS NEW DELHI AND 4 OTHERS

WRIC/6679/2025 · 2025-07-17

Manish Kumar, Rajan Roy

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40812-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6679 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Lalita Tiwari Respondent :- U.O.I. Thru. The Secy. Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways New Delhi And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.,Sarvesh Kumar Dubey Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. Heard Mr. Vijay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Manish Mishra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 5. The petitioner has challenged a communication dated 24.10.2017 to the District Magistrate, Lucknow referring the matter for adjudication under Section 3-H (4) of the National Highway Act, 1956 and other communicated dated 30.09.2023 addressed to the petitioner. There is some discrepancy in the two documents, as, in the communication dated 24.10.2017 rights in respect of Gata No. 1368 are said to be disputed, whereas, in the communication dated 30.09.2023 rights in respect of Gata No. 1368 क are said to be disputed, though, the area of gata is same. The petitioner's case is that she has rights in Gata No. 1368 ख and not in Gata No. 1368 क. It is also her contention that once the theoretical division of Gata No. 1368 has taken place, then, there can not be any separate independent existence of Gata No. 1368. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the opposite party no. 4 should clarify the matter and communicate clear instruction to the petitioner as to whether there is any dispute pertaining to Gata No. 1368 ख in respect of which the petitioner claims to be recorded, which may have been referred to the District Judge, Lucknow under Section 3-H (4) of the National Highway Act, 1956 or not. He will get the said fact verified and then, communicate it to the petitioner. Let this be done within a period of 10 days from the date a certified copy of this order is submitted. The impugned communication shall abide by the fresh communication to be issued as aforesaid. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition is disposed of. . (Manish Kumar,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Order Date :- 17.7.2025 R.K.P. Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench