SMT. SITA AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
WRIC/31025/2025 · 2025-09-07
Amitabh Kumar Rai, Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 92410 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 92410 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 31025 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J.
HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3-NOIDA.
2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for a mandamus directing the respondents-authorities either to allot remaining 5% developed abadi land or compensate the petitioners by payment of the amount equivalent to balance area as per average rate of allotment made of developed residential plots in the light of judgment and order dated 21.10.2011 passed by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Gajraj and others v. State of U.P. and others 2011 (11) ADJ-I. Alternatively, prayer is made to decide the representation dated 26.5.2025 filed by petitioners before the respondent no. 3 (Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition).
3. At the very outset, Sri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the contesting-respondent raised two-fold objections qua maintainability of the writ petition. Firstly, the petitioners were not a party before the Full Bench in Gajraj (supra). Secondly, the issue is no more res integra as the Division Bench had already decided the controversy in hand and rejected the claim in Runwell India Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. and Others (Writ-C No. 14113 of 2017) in the light of judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Khatoon and others v. State of U.P. and others 2018(14) SC 346.
4. Confronted with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ganga Dhar Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Kaushalendra Nath Singh Smt. Sita And 2 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
states that the instant writ petition may be dismissed as not pressed.
5. Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed. September 8, 2025 A.K.Srivastava WRIC No. 31025 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad