Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 192387 (ALL)

SRI HARI KANT SHARMA AND 11 OTHERS v. GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/69067/2013 · 2025-10-12

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 69067 of 2013 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J. 1. Heard Shri Akshat Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri Vibhu Rai, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayers:- "i] Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents from demolishing the house of the Petitioners situated in village Dundahera, Ghaziabad. ii] Issue A writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 11/05/10 passed by respondent no. 4. (Annexure 9 to the writ petition)." 3. It is agreed between the counsel for the parties that identical matter has already been decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 14.12.2016 passed in Writ C No.4009 of 2011 (Rafat Bano vs. Ghaziabad Development Authority And Another). Order reads as follows:- "Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner before this Court seeks a direction upon the respondents Ghaziabad Development Authority, Ghaziabad and its officers not to demolish construction raised over plot no. 45 situate in village Doondahera, Ghaziabad as well as for quashing of the notification dated 11.05.2010. It is the case of the petitioner that the constructions are long standing and the village where the building has been raised was included within the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akshat Sinha, Y.K. Sinha Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anoop Trivedi (Senior Adv.), Mahendra Pratap, Rohan Gupta Sri Hari Kant Sharma And 11 Others .....Petitioner(s) Ghaziabad Development Authority And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) territorial limits of Ghaziabad Development Authority under the notification dated 12.02.2010. Any construction raised prior to said date could not be required to be demolished on the ground that the construction has been raised without any sanctioned map. It is further contended that the clarification that has been issued by the State Government vide notification dated 10.05.2010 which directs that since the villages named in the notification namely Doondahera, Akbarpur, Bahrampur and Mawal were earlier included within the territorial limits of Ghaziabad Development authority under notification dated 09.03.1997 and that they have been de-notified from the territorial limits of NOIDA under notification dated 07.05.1999. The villages shall be deemed to be within the territorial limits of Ghaziabad Development Authority is illegal as no territorial limits can be increased from a back date and further the villages were never notified to be within the territorial limits of Ghaziabad Development Authority after de-notification from the territorial limits of NOIDA on and after from 07.05.1999 till the notification dated 12.01.2010. In our opinion the writ petition appears to be wholly misconceived. The Government Order dated 11.05.2010 is only clarificatory in nature. If any notice is issued by the Ghaziabad Development Authority for demolition of the constructions raised, the petitioner may demonstrate before the authorities that the constructions have been raised at the time when the village in question was not within the territorial limits of Ghaziabad Development Authority, therefore, no map was not required to be sanctioned and it is for the authorities concerned to examine all aspects of the matter and pass a reasoned speaking order strictly in accordance with law. It goes without saying that it is open for the petitioner to make an application for compounding which shall be considered by the authorities as per the provisions applicable. With the aforesaid observation/direction the present writ petition is disposed of. " 4. In this view of the matter, the present writ petition is, therefore, disposed of for the same reasons and with the same directions. (Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.) October 13, 2025 Swati WRIC No. 69067 of 2013 2 Digitally signed by :- SWATI PATHAK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SWATI PATHAK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad