Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43771-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6741 of 2025 Petitioner :- Keshavram Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko. And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Kaushal Kishore Tewari,Shakti Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sudhir Chaturvedi Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Heard. 2. This petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 4 to make the payment of compensation of land bearing Gata no. 472, area 0.052 hectare situated in village - Jafarpur, Pargana and Tehsil Mehmudabad, District Sitapur which would be four times the circle rate or the market value of the land, whichever is higher, at the time of acquisition of land. (ii) Issue writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to release the land of Gata no. 472, area 0.052 hectare situated in village Jafarpur, Pargana and Tehsil Mehmudabad, District Sitapur forthwith to the petitioner if adequate compensation is not given. (iii) Issue writ, order, or direction for conducting inquiry for wrongfully taking possession of land of Gata no. 472, area 0.052 hectare situated in village - Jafarpur, Pargana and Tehsil Mehmudabad, District Sitapur and action against the erring officials may also be taken for gross abuse of powers. (iv) Issue such other writ, order or direction as it may deem just and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case." 3. On 17.07.2025 we had passed the following order:- "Mr. Dinesh Gautam, Assistant Engineer, U.P. Bridge Corporation, Sitapur is present. He says 4-5 dumper of soil has been put on the agricultural land of the petitioner which has not been purchased as yet nor compulsorily acquired. This is clearly an encroachment on the petitioner's land bearing Gata No. 472. No doubt, the object is construction of a pulia which is a public purpose, but, then there is a law in this regard. If at all the opposite parties were to enter into the land of the petitioner, they should have entered into an agreement with the petitioner seeking his permission or should have purchased it, if not, then compulsorily acquired it, but it is not as if the State or its instrumentalities can enter anybody's land whenever they feel like, without adopting the process of law. The Assistant Engineer seeks a week's time to sort out the matter. List this case on 29.07.2025, as fresh. The Project Manager, U.P. Bridge Corporation, Sitapur shall get the matter resolved before the next date or he shall remove the soil which has been put on the land of the petitioner. It is also open for the opposite parties to enter into a rental agreement, if otherwise permissible, for the aforesaid purposes, so that the public purpose may not be jeopardized" 4. It is now informed by the learned counsel for the Bridge Corporation that a rent agreement has been arrived at between his client and the petitioner. The Petitioner's counsel accepts the same. He, however, says that so far as sale of the land is concerned, the petitioner is not agreeable to sell it on the price being offered by the Bridge Corporation based on the circle rate rather it should be on the market rate. 5. This is not a matter for our consideration. We are not concerned with the other transactions. As long as the agreement subsists it will operate unless there is any legal impediment. Thereafter the petitioner can seek remedy for eviction of the opposite parties from his land etc. as per law. 6. With these observations/directions, this petition is disposed of. (Saurabh Lavania, J.) (Rajan Roy, J.) Order Date :- 29.7.2025 Anand/- Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench