Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 179096 (ALL)

MANOJ KUMAR YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF REVENUE LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/11130/2025 · 2025-12-03

Amitabh Kumar Rai, Sangeeta Chandra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11130 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State respondent. 2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayer:- "to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, thereby quashing the impugned letters dated 19.9.2025 and 10.8.2023 issued by the opposite party No. 3 contained as annexure No. 1 and 2 respectively to the instant writ petition." 3. It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that Gata No.1260 ad-measuring 0.3000 ha situated in Village Ramuwapr Dubai, Pargana Kheron, Tehsil Lalganj, District Raebareli, was recorded in the name of several tenure holders and the petitioner is the legal heir of one of such tenure holders. His father had established a boring over his part of Gata No.1260 and had taken an electricity connection for the said purpose. Some rooms were also constructed thereon. UPEIDA has acquired the land for the purpose of Ganga Expressway Project. The compensation for land has been given, but compensation for the assets standing on the land has not been paid. 4. The petitioner has repeatedly moved an application before the respondent no.2 and the respondent no.3 has informed the petitioner that compensation for the assets determined at Rs.3,44,454/- have been deposited with the respondent no.4. The said decision has been taken arbitrarily. The petitioner has not been given any notice. The petitioner is the recorded tenure holder as per the relevant Khatauni. Hence, this petition has been filed. 5. Sri Rahul Kapoor, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State Respondents, on the basis of instructions, says that there were several tenure Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shobhit Kumar Pandey, Sanjay Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Manoj Kumar Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) holders of Gata No.1260. The question of partition of Gata No.1260 and apportionment of compensation could not be decided earlier and, therefore, the amount was deposited in the office of the respondent no.4. Now, a Report has been submitted indicating the proportion of compensation that has to be given to each of the tenure holders and that the same shall be disbursed expeditiously. 6. A copy of the written instructions sent by Additional District Magistrate/ S.L.A.O., Raebareli dated 15.11.2025 has been produced before this Court, which is taken on record. 7. This petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent no.4 to ensure that the amount that is due to the petitioner, on the basis of the Report, is given to him as expeditiously as possible, say, within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced before him. December 3, 2025 Rahul WRIC No. 11130 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench