HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 34770 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents, Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel appears for respondent no.2. 2. The instant writ petition is preferred for a direction to the respondent no.2 not to demolish the existing residential house/shops of the petitioners situated over Khasra No.71, village Shakarpur, Tehsil and District Meerut without carrying out actual physical measurement of the acquired land. Alternatively, It is further prayed to the respondent nos.2 & 3 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 06.09.2025, in accordance with law. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents raised an objection and submits admittedly, the petitioners' holdings have been acquired and submits that the National Highway Authority of India was published at extraordinary Gazette notification dated 15.07.2011 under Section 3-D of the National Highways Act, 1956 whereby acquired area 0.0080 hectare (80 sq.m.) for more widening the Delhi-Meerut Expressway connecting link National Highway No.58. As the extraordinary gazette was published on 04.04.2022 under Section 3(b) of the National Highway Act, 1956, acquiring more land to be acquired for the said purpose, the authority on the spot has further acquired the area 0.30 hectare (3050 sq. m.) out of khasra no.71. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners in this backdrop submits that in view of the alignment report dated 02.06.2025, which is submitted by the revenue team, certain petitioner's holdings are also affected even though which is not acquired. 5. Learned A.C.S.C. and Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for respondent no.2 fairly submit that the land in question has been acquired Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Alka Srivastava, Pranab Kumar Ganguli Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., C.S.C., Pranjal Mehrotra Mohd. Usman And 13 Others .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) in accordance with law and adequate compensation has already been disbursed. The petitioners are pressing the highly disputed fact, which cannot be adverted under the writ jurisdiction, the same is to be decided in accordance with law by the competent revenue authority. In case, the matter is to be finalized by the revenue officials under the Code, 2006, definitely, at this stage, the authority is not in a position to disburse the compensation. In absence thereof, no such relief can be granted for compensation in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. Considering the factual aspect of the matter, we are not inclined to advert the matter on merits. With the consent of the parties, we dispose of the instant writ petition with an observation that in case, the petitioners move a detailed representation before the District Magistrate within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders. The said exercise is to be carried out within a period of three months. Needless to say we have not adverted the matter on merits. October 14, 2025 Priya WRIC No. 34770 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad