HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 17303 of 2026 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Shashwat Pandey holding brief of Sri Anshul Kumar Singhal, learned counsel for the petitioners; Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mrs. Anjali Upadhya, learned counsel for the respondent-Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for a mandamus commanding the respondent no. 3 to decide the application preferred by the petitioners under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 dated 01.09.2020 within a stipulated period. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners' holding forming part of Gata/Khasra No. 1051 situated in village Tusiyana Pargana and Tehsil Dadri, District Gautambuddh Nagar was acquired by the State Government for planned industrial development through Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA) vide Notifications issued under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 dated 18.10.1997 and 25.11.1997 respectively. Consequently, statutory award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (in short 'Act') was declared by the competent authority on 11.12.2008 awarding compensation @ Rs. 74.41/- per square yard to the petitioners. Against the said award, petitioners had preferred an application under Section 18 of the Act for reference but the said application remained pending for consideration. Subsequently, Land Acquisition Reference No. 02 of 2010 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anshul Kumar Singhal Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anjali Upadhya, C.S.C. Gajraj Singh And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) (Smt. Shwetana and others v. State of U.P. and another) registered on application moved by co-tenureholders was decided by judgment and order dated 29.07.2020 whereby the amount of compensation has been enhanced to Rs. 850 per square meter. Learned counsel for the petitioners in this backdrop submits that immediately thereafter the petitioners also moved an application under Section 28-A of the Act before the respondent no. 3 on 01.09.2020 for re-determination of amount of compensation in the light of award dated 29.07.2020 well within time. Since then even though the petitioners are suffering from irreparable loss but the application under Section 28-A of the Act has not been decided by the respondent no. 3 till date. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon Division Bench judgment of this Court in Ved Prakash Saini and 45 others v. State of U.P. and 2 others, 2025 (9) ADJ 679 wherein this Court has held that Section 28-A of the Act, 1894 is a beneficent provision that must be interpreted liberally to achieve its object of removing inequality in compensation awards. 4. Per contra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has raised an objection qua maintainability of the instant proceeding and submits that no documentary evidence has been placed on record to indicate that the application under Section 28A of the Act was filed well within time and in absence of any such material, no such concrete finding can be adverted by the writ Court. 5. We have heard rival submissions and perused the record. 6. So far as factual aspect of the matter, whether the application under Section 28-A of the Act was moved well within time, is concerned, there is nothing on record to show that the application under Section 28-A of the Act was moved well within time and in absence of any such documentary evidence, at this stage we are not in a position to advert the matter on merit. This factual aspect can be verified only by the respondents after verifying the record. We further observe that in case the application under Section 28-A of the Act is well within time, this factual aspect may be examined by the Competent Authority and in case the claim of the petitioners is admissible in law, the said application is to be WRIC No. 17303 of 2026 2 decided expeditiously in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid observations and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. May 5, 2026 A.K.Srivastava WRIC No. 17303 of 2026 3 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad