HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 16690 of 2026 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Ms. Ananya Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State- respondents and Sri Tejasvi Misra, learned counsel for the Ghaziabad Development Authority. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for a mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the compensation/consideration at non-agricultural rate of the land falling in Gata no. 657, area 0.8433 hectare, village Mathurapur, Tehsil & District Ghaziabad in pursuance to public notice dated 06.01.2025 at the earliest. Further prayed for a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the aforesaid land and exclude the land in question from mutual acquisition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the land in question falls under the territorial jurisdiction of Ghaziabad Development Authority. The petitioner is lawful tenureholder with transferable bhumidhar rights of Gata no. 657, area 0.8433 hectare, village Mathurapur, Tehsil & District Ghaziabad. In support of her submission, she has placed reliance upon the order dated 21.12.2012 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate under Section 143 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 whereby the aforesaid land of the petitioner was declared as non agricultural land. She submits that the said order was challenged in appeal, which too was dismissed vide order dated 09.05.2013 passed by Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aditya Kant Sharma, Ananya Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Tejasvi Misra Sanjeev Tyagi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Additional District Magistrate in Appeal no. 51/12-13. Against the said order, no further proceeding has been drawn by the State and as such, for all practical purposes the land of the petitioner is to be treated as non- agricultural land. Under the facts and circumstances, it is claimed that the petitioner is entitled to receive compensation at the rate of non- agricultural land. 4. On the other hand, Sri Misra, learned counsel for the contesting- respondent submits that the respondents have proceeded to acquire the said land through mutual negotiation as such there is no pressure by the Authority for surrender of land in question. In case, the petitioner is not inclined to enter into agreement, there is no pressure on behalf the respondent-Authority. He also submits that the respondent-Authority would definitely adhere with Government Order dated 21.5.2016. 5. Considering the factual situation as the Authority has proceeded to acquire the land in question through mutual negotiation and once the categorical undertaking is given by learned counsel for the respondent- Authority, we expect the land in question would not be acquired except in accordance with law. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. May 7, 2026 A.K.Srivastava WRIC No. 16690 of 2026 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad