Disposed

Aditya Sharan Gupta v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2024WRIC/24078/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking direction to release land acquisition compensation despite pending title suit. Court directed Competent Authority to issue speaking order after hearing all claimants within twelve weeks citing National Highways Act provisions.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Competent Authority to pass speaking order after hearing within twelve weeks to determine compensation release.

Aditya Sharan Gupta vs State of Up and Another — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:172389-DB

¶2

Court No. - 21

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24078 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Aditya Sharan Gupta Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Shikher Trivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

¶6

The prayer made in the instant petition is for a direction to the respondents to award and grant compensation to the petitioner in terms of letter dated 03.06.2024 within stipulated period of time.

¶7

The facts in brief are that the respondents issued notification under Section 3-A on 17.08.2022 under the National Highways Act, 1956 for acquisition of certain land. It included the land of Araji No. 2008 area 1.1890 hectare which according to the petitioner belongs to him having been purchased by sale deed dated 21.04.1981 from the recorded tenure holder Smt. Premwati. It was followed by notification under Section 3-D dated 17.12.2022 and an award dated 06.07.2023. The petitioner was informed by the Competent Authority by letter dated 03.06.2024 that sum of Rs.4,65,79,784.00 has been determined as compensation for the subject land. Since the compensation amount has not been released in favour of the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner has filed the instant petition.

¶8

Learned standing counsel has placed on record the instructions received by him from the Competent Authority, according to which, the compensation amount has not been released so far in view of pendency of Original Suit No. 611 of 2024, (Sumitra @ Nanki vs. Anil Kumar and others) in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kanpur Nagar.

¶9

The petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit annexing therewith copy of the plaint to demonstrate that the said suit is wholly frivolous and abuse of the process

¶10

of the Court. Thereby, the plaintiffs have sought cancellation of sale-deed executed in favour of the petitioner on 26.06.1981 i.e.almost after forty years. He submits that the petitioner has already filed an application under Order 7 Rule XII of CPC for rejection of the plaint and the same is pending. He submits that the Competent Authority in any view of the matter should consider the issue relating to release of compensation as per provisions of Section 3H(3) and 3H(4) of the Act.

¶11

Shri Rajiv Gupta, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel also makes the same submission.

¶12

In our opinion, the Competent Authority has to examine the issue in the light of Sections 3H(3) and 3H(4) of the Act.

¶13

Accordingly, we dispose of the instant petition with direction to the Competent Authority to pass a speaking order after hearing the petitioner and the newly impleaded respondent i.e. Sumitra Devi or any other person claiming any right in the subject land for the compensation awarded within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of the instant order along with a fresh representation.

¶14

Order Date :- 5.11.2024 Mukesh Kr.

¶15

(Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.)

¶16

Digitally signed by :- MUKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Aditya Sharan Gupta v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aditya Sharan Gupta v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt Sushila Devi vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shiva Puri Goswami vs Up State Industrial Development Authority and Another

Sirajuddin and 8 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Doodhnath vs State of Up and 9 Others

Sri Krishna and Another vs Union of India and 5 Others

Virendra Tiwari and 2 Others vs State of Up and 2 Others