HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9943 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner with the following main prayers:- "(i.) issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus, or any other suitable writ, commanding the opposite parties not to displace the petitioner and her family members, because the petitioner's property still remains in her possession, pursuant to acquisition and demolition that took place on 06.08.2024 up to the official markings, (ii.) issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding and directing the opposite parties to pay to the petitioner due and adequate compensation to the tune of Rs. 6,70,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Seventy Thousand only). representing the actual pecuniary loss suffered on account of the unlawful demolition and destruction of her residential house, shop, household belongings, together with additional compensation towards the cost of repeated litigations wrongfully occasioned by the acts of the opposite parties, as well as for the severe mental and physical trauma inflicted upon the petitioner and her family members, so as to do complete and substantial justice, Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Asit Srivastava, Rakesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sharad Tewari Madhuri .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt.Of Revenue Lko. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) (iii.) issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding and directing the opposite party no. 6, i.e., the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, Lucknow, to decide the reference dated 23.03.2023, which was duly forwarded by opposite party no. 3 by its letter dated 23.11.2023, in a time-bound manner, as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the ends and interests of justice." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that house of the petitioner was illegally demolished without giving proper notice and no compensation was paid as per the earlier order of this Court dated 30.05.2023 passed in Writ-C No.4128 of 2023 (Smt. Madhuri and another vs. State of U.P. and others). He also submits that the respondents are trying to demolish the house beyond the area of actual acquisition. 4. On the contrary, Shri Punit Jaiswal, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has submitted that compensation had already been deposited with the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Authority, but the petitioner did not take the same rather he challenged the acquisition proceedings by filing a reference. He has also submitted that they will not demolish anything which is beyond acquisition limits. 5. Upon due consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the petitioner had been given a notice on 29.04.2024 to vacate the house and after giving proper notice and time of more than one and half months, the house was demolished. Hence, there appears to be no illegality in the demolition. So far as the compensation is concerned, it appears that petitioner herself chose not to pick up the compensation for which authorities are not responsible, and thus, the writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. 6. The petitioner shall be at liberty to make appropriate application before the authorities for the alleged illegal demolition, if any. October 14, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/- WRIC No. 9943 of 2025 2 (Prashant Kumar,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench