Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2016 (ALL)

SURENDRA AND 4 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIC/16423/2026 · 2026-05-05

Kunal Ravi Singh, Mahesh Chandra Tripathi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 16423 of 2026 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State respondents and Ms. Ishita Sand holding brief of Ms. Anjali Upadhya, learned counsel for Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (in short "GNIDA"). 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent - Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, Gautam Buddh Nagar, to consider the claim of the petitioners for allotment of 6% developed abadi land in lieu of their acquired land, comprising Khasra No. 288 admeasuring 1.0750 hectare and Khasra No. 290 admeasuring 0.1640 hectare of Khata No. 44, and Khasra No. 291 (Ka) admeasuring 0.6960 hectare, Khasra No. 359 admeasuring 0.5560 hectare, and Khasra No. 365 admeasuring 0.3410 hectare of Khata No. 179, situated in Village Tussiyana, Tehsil and District Gautam Buddh Nagar, within a stipulated period, and to allot the same to the petitioners accordingly. 3. Learned counsel for GNIDA has vehemently opposed the writ petition and submitted that the relief, as has been prayed for, is not amenable under the Scheme in question. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the issue raised herein would require a factual enquiry. Without entering into the merits of the case, we direct that the petitioner shall file a fresh representation before the respondent authority within two weeks from today along with a copy of this order and the respondent authority is under Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Raghubir Singh, Rakesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anjali Upadhya, C.S.C. Surendra And 4 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) obligation to take an expeditious decision by passing a reasoned and speaking order strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a further period of six weeks. 5. The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly. May 6, 2026 Mukesh Kr. WRIC No. 16423 of 2026 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- MUKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad