Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 182098 (ALL)

SHIVANAND v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT. SECTT. LKO. AND 5 OTHERS

/11869/2025 · 2025-12-16

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11869 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J. 1. This is a petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by the freezing of his bank account based on an order dated 17.08.2025 passed by the Opposite Party No. 3, Uppar Up Jila Adhikari, Sadar, District - Sultanpur. 2. A question had fallen from this Court upon the State's Counsel as to under which authority, the said order has been passed by the Opposite Party No. 3. Till date, we have not received any answer as to under which provision of law, such a drastic measure has been taken by the Opposite Party No. 3 which has been complied by the Bank authorities being Opposite Party No. 6. 3. We are of the view that if a compensation paid under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, has been passed by the competent authority and the said sum has been paid to the land owners, any subsequent arbitration award that reduces the said award can only be enforced by way of execution petition filed under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 4. In light of the same, in the present matter, we are of the view that in so far as the petitioner is concerned, the freezing of the bank account of the petitioner is illegal and without any basis in law. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sushil Kumar Singh, Devansh Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Avdhesh Shukla, Sarvesh Kumar Dubey Shivanand .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Sectt. Lko. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. Accordingly, the bank authorities are directed to unfreeze the account of the petitioner and allow normal functioning of the account of the petitioner. Any amount that has been held by the Bank authorities should be released in accordance with law immediately forthwith. 6. Needless to mention, if any attachment order is passed in execution proceedings under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the bank shall comply with the same in accordance with law. 7. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. December 16, 2025 Lokesh Kumar WRIC No. 11869 of 2025 2 (Manjive Shukla,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) Digitally signed by :- LOKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench