HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 33478 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J. 1. Heard Sri Udbhav Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State- respondent and Sri Hari Narayan Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.5- Gram Pancayat, Ratanpur, District-Etawah. 2. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred for a direction commanding the respondents to give legitimate compensation to the petitioner of his land situated in Gata No. 146 area 0.6600 hectare of Village-Ratanpur, Pargana-Bharthana, Tehsil- Bharthana, District-Etawah, which was illegally taken by them in construction of road. It is also prayed for a direction to the respondent no.2 to consider and decide the rerpresentation of petitioner dated 11.07.2025 within stipulated period. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a bhumidhar with transferable rights of the land bearing Gata No. 146 area 0.6600 of hectare who has acquired so after the death of his father. In support of his submission, he placed reliance upon the revenue records. He submits that the respondents had initially tried to lay down a link road by encroaching upon the petitioner's holding. Consequently the petitioner instituted an Original Suit No. 249 of 2000 (Chetram vs. State of U.p. and another) seeking an injunction against the respondent no.2. He submits that the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Court No.2, Etawah allowed the same and passed a judgment and decree dated 15.10.2007 wherein the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Udbhav Tripathi, Uma Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Hari Narayan Singh Chetram .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) defendants were restrained from extracting soil from the legal chak road over the land in dispute. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the defendants/respondents had never challenged the said judgment and decree in appeal and the said suit for injunction has attained its finality. In this backdrop he submits that even though an order has been passed in his favour the respondent had carried out some constructions over the disputed land. The petitioner had also instituted the proceeding under Order 39 Rule 2A of the CPC which is stated to be pending consideration. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner undertakes that if legitimate compensation is given to him for the land, which is subject to challenge, he will withdraw his contempt application filed before the concerned court and he is ready to hand over the possession. The petitioner has no objection if the road is constructed and the soil is extracted for development by the respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the State-respondents informed the Court that for redressal of grievance of tenure holder, claiming certain right/title over their land, the State Government had issued detailed Government Order dated 12.05.2016, which provides that in case the claimant files claim supported with requisite documents, the same would be considered by the District Level Committee for ensuring adequate compensation in the light of Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short the 'Act 2013'). He submits that once the efficacious remedy is available to the petitioner, the matter should be relegated to the District Level Committee, which may examine the claim of petitioners within a reasonable time and submit its report to the Chairman/District Magistrate, who may accord adequate compensation accordingly. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the relief prayed in the instant matter, we dispose of the instant petition with liberty to the petitioners to make fresh representation along with true attested copy of the instant order before District Level Committee constituted under the Government Order dated 12.05.2016 within two weeks. In the event, such representation is made, the District Level Committee shall consider the claim of the petitioners and ensure that the proceeding shall be finalised expeditiously, preferably within three months thereafter. WRIC No. 33478 of 2025 2 8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. September 23, 2025 Ashish Pd. WRIC No. 33478 of 2025 3 (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH PRASAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad