HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 33330 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4- NOIDA. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred with following principal reliefs:- "i. issue an order or direction in the nature of mandamus commonding the Respondent No.3 for allotment of 5% additional developed Abadi land in favour of the Petitioner in their acquired land having Khasra No.95/2, area 0.715 Hectere, Khasra No. 95/4, area 0.26 Hectere, Khasra No.766, area 4.290 Hectere of Khata No.53 and Khasra No.97, area 1.675 Hectere of Khata No.290 of the land admeasuring in the revenue estate of Village Sorkha Jahidabad, Tehsil and Pargana Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar, within an stipulated time period, in the light of law declared by the Full Bench of this Hon'ble High Court in Gajraj and others Vs State of U.P. and others, reported in 2011(11) ADJ 1 (FB) and order dated 14.05.2015 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP No.36354 of 2011. ii. issue an order or direction in the nature of mandamus commonding the Respondent No.3 to decide the Application dated 27.09.2023, filed by the Petitioner for allotment of 5% additional Abadi area in their acquired land having Khasra No.95/2, area 0.715 Hectere, Khasra No.95/4, area 0.26 Hectere, Khasra No.766, area 4.290 Hectere of Khata No.53 and Khasra No.97, area 1.675 Hectere of Khata No.290 of the land admeasuring in the revenue estate of Village Sorkha Jahidabad, Tehsil and Pargana- Dadri, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, within an stipulated time period, in the light of law declared by the Full Bench of this court in Gajraj and others Vs State of U.P. and others, reported in 2011 (11) ADJ 1 (FB) and order dated 14.05.2015 passed by theHon'ble Apex Court in SLP No.36354 of 2011." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in identical facts and circumstances, a Co-ordinate Bench had passed a detailed order on 11.07.2025 in Writ-C No. 21804 of 2025 (Diwan Singh and 7 others v. State of U.P. and 3 others). The operative part of the order passed in the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mahendra Pratap Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Kaushalendra Nath Singh Amar Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) said writ petition is as follows:- "4. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to make representation before the Chief Executive Officer, Noida within two weeks from today along with true attested copy of the instant order and in which event, it shall be decided by the said respondents within next eight weeks. " 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the instant matter is squarely covered with the aforesaid judgment and the writ petition may also be disposed of in the light of Diwan Singh (supra). 5. So far as the factual and legal aspect of the matter, the same is not disputed by learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel as well as counsel for the NOIDA. 6. Having regard to the facts of the case and the submissions made, we dispose of the instant petition in terms of Diwan Singh(supra). October 6, 2025 A.K.Srivastava WRIC No. 33330 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad