HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 36846 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Uttara Bahuguna, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 - New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA). 2. This writ petition has been filed praying inter alia for the following relief: "1. issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.3 not to interfere in peaceful possession of the petitioner over the land Khasra No. 819-M area 0.3796 Hectare situated in the village Sorkha Jahidabad, Pargana and Tahsil Dadri District Gautam Budh Nagar in due course of law, so that justice may be done." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the petitioner is the recorded tenure holder of the aforesaid Gata No. 819-M. In support of his submission, reliance has been placed on the proceedings under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, dated 22.05.2025. It is submitted that after due demarcation on the spot, actual possession was handed over by the revenue officials, and a memo of possession has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. Learned counsel further submits that since the petitioner is a recorded tenure holder and the kurra Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anil Kumar Dubey, Chandra Bhan Dubey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Kaushalendra Nath Singh Subhash Chandra .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) bandi has also been finalized, the NOIDA Authority has no right to interfere with his peaceful possession. He further states that the petitioner does not intend to raise any construction over the disputed land without following due procedure under the U.P. Industrial Area Development Act, 1976; therefore, his lawful rights cannot be infringed. 4. Shri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.2 – NOIDA, resists the aforesaid relief and submits that it is an admitted position that the village in question falls within the territorial jurisdiction of the NOIDA Authority. He states that, at this stage, he is not in a position to confirm whether the land in question has been acquired or not, but fairly adds that since heavy reliance has been placed upon the proceedings under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, the Authority shall examine the matter and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law. 5. Considering the factual situation and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with the observation that, in case the petitioner submits a detailed representation before the Chief Executive Officer, NOIDA Authority, the same shall be considered and decided by the said Authority expeditiously, in accordance with law. October 29, 2025 NLY WRIC No. 36846 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad