Disposed

Deepak Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC6 Apr 2023WRIC/10305/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking compensation for land utilized for road construction without acquisition or due process. The petitioners were directed to file a fresh representation with the District Magistrate within two weeks for a time-bound hearing and decision.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to move a fresh representation before the District Magistrate within two weeks.

Deepak Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 40

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10305 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Deepak Kumar And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhaju Ram Pprasad Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Manjive Shukla,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶6

The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to command the respondent no.2 and 3 to pay adequate compensation of Plot no.107, 121, 122, 124 and 125 situated in Village Bharwalia, Pargana Tilpur, Tehsil Nichlaul, District Maharajganj to the tenure holders of the said plots.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that while constructing the road by Public Works Department, some land of the petitioner has also been utilised without any due process. He further submits that neither the said land has been acquired under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. nor any compensation is being paid and in most arbitrary manner, the land in question has been utilised. He also submits that the petitioners have represented before the District Magistrate, Maharajganj, which is unattended.

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel assures the Court that in the event a fresh representation is moved by the petitioners, it shall be considered and decided expeditiously.

¶9

In the facts and circumstances of the case, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending consideration. The writ petition is disposed of asking the petitioners to move a fresh representation ventilating all his grievance before the District Magistrate, Maharajganj. In case any such representation is moved by the petitioners within two weeks, the same shall be considered by the District Magistrate, Maharajganj in accordance with law, who must accord audience to the parties having stake in the matter especially the Public Works Department and only thereafter decide the said representation expeditiously preferably in two months' further time.

¶10

Order Date :- 6.4.2023 A. Pandey

¶11

Digitally signed by :- ANAND PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepak Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiv Dutt Sharma Vs Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh and Another

Nivedita Shahi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Prashant Kumar Tyagi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Shakuntla Devi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Kashmir Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others