HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 23189 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J. HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for respondents. 2. Present petition has been filed seeking following relief:- "(I) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to stop the construction of the road on the and also remove the partly constructed road on Bhumidhari Land bearing Gata No. 42 Rakba 0.3540 hectare situated in Mauza Sisai Sipah, Pargana Sikandara, Tehsil Phoolpur, District Prayagraj. (II) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus to pay the compensation for illegally taking the land of the aforesaid Arazi i.e. Gata No. 42 Rakba 0.3540 hectare situated in Mauza Sisai Sipah, Pargana Sikandara, Tehsil Phoolpur, District Prayagraj for construction of the road without any formal acquisition. (III) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to restrain the petitioner from constructing the boundary wall on his Bhumadhari Land i.e. Gata No. 42 Rakba 0.3540 hectare situated in Mauza Sisai Sipah, Pargana Sikandara, Tehsil Phoolpur, District Prayagraj." 3. Pursuant to order dated 21.07.2025, learned standing counsel produced instruction dated 25.09.2025, which is taken on record. Based upon instruction, he submitted that road upon land in question was constructed with the consent of all share holders in the year 2009-10 and now petition Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abrar Ahmad Siddiqui Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Kamrujjama .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) has been filed to remove the construction in alternative pay compensation. Learned standing counsel has also invited attention of the judgment of Apex Court in the matter of Syed Maqbool Ali Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 2913-2914 of 2011 dated 04.04.2011 and submitted that in light of judgment of Apex Court, no relief may be granted to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner was not in a position to dispute the fact that Kachcha Rasta was constructed in the year 2009-10 and later on, Pakka Rasta was constructed in the year 2013-14 by Public Works Department. 5. I have considered the submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties and perused the the record as well as judgment of Apex Court in the matter of Syed Maqbool Ali (Supra). Relevant paragraphs of judgment of Apex Court is being quoted below; "High Courts should also be cautious in entertaining writ petitions filed decades after the dispossession, seeking directions for acquisition and payment of compensation. It is not uncommon for villagers to offer/donate some part of their lands voluntarily for a public purpose which would benefit them or the community. -as for example, construction of an access road to the village or their property, or construction of a village tank or a bund to prevent flooding/erosion. When they offer their land for such public purpose, the land would be of little or negligible value. But decades later, when land values increase, either on account of passage of time or on account of developments or improvements carried out by the State, the land holders come up with belated claims alleging that their lands were taken without acquisition and without their consent. When such claims are made after several decades, the State would be at a disadvantage to contest the claim, as it may not have the records to show in what circumstances the lands were given/donated and whether the land was given voluntarily. Therefore, belated writ petitions, without proper explanation for the delay, are liable to be dismissed. Be that as it may." 6. In light of judgment of Apex Court, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. WRIC No. 23189 of 2025 2 7. Accordingly, petition lacks merit and is dismissed. No order as to costs. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he may be permitted to file civil suit. 8. Needless to say that it is always open for the petitioner to file civil suit in accordance with law and for that no permission is required from the Court. October 14, 2025 Arvind WRIC No. 23189 of 2025 3 (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad