Dismissed¶11

Mohd. Shakeel and 160 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Allahabad HC2 Jan 2025WRIC/36586/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (DB) dismisses writ petition (WRIT - C 36586/2024, Mohd. Shakeel & 160 others v. State of U.P.) for want of prosecution on 2.1.2025; claim arose from acquisition proceedings more than fifty years old; no pleading of non-deposit of compensation under original award or non-taking of possession; interim order 12.12.2024 doubted entertainability of half-century-old acquisition petition, adjourned for supplementary affidavit which was never filed; neutral citation 2025:AHC:216-DB.

What did the court decide?

As no supplementary affidavit was filed in pursuance of the previous order, the writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution; the entertainability question was not adjudicated. ¶11

Mohd. Shakeel and 160 Others vs State of Up and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition, filed more than fifty years after the acquisition proceedings and lacking any pleading that compensation under the original award was not deposited or that possession was not taken from the petitioners or their ancestors, should be entertained at all.

¶9

Court's answer

The court recorded that there was no pleading that compensation under the original award had not been deposited, nor that possession had not been taken from the petitioners or their ancestors in pursuance of the acquisition proceedings.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

As no supplementary affidavit was filed in pursuance of the previous order, the writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution; the entertainability question was not adjudicated.

¶11

Key takeaways

The court expressed serious doubt whether the instant petition, filed more than fifty years after the acquisition, should be entertained; it did not finally decide the point, adjourning instead for supplementary pleadings.obiter¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WRIT - C No. 36586 of 2024 — Mohd. Shakeel & 161 others v. State of U.P. & 3 others — High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (DB: Manoj Kumar Gupta & Anish Kumar Gupta, JJ.), decided 2.1.2025 (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:216-DB). Writ petition concerning acquisition proceedings dating back more than fifty years. By interim order of 12.12.2024 the court noted the absence of any pleading that compensation under the original award remained undeposited or that possession had not been taken from the petitioners or their ancestors, doubted whether so stale a petition should be entertained, yet at counsel's insistence adjourned the matter to 02.01.2025 to be taken up afresh to allow supplementation of pleadings. No supplementary affidavit was filed. On 2.1.2025 the petition was dismissed for want of prosecution; the entertainability question was left unadjudicated. No statutes or precedents were cited in the reported text.

Mohd. Shakeel and 160 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Shakeel and 160 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Gag Hospitality LLP vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Omkar and 3 Others vs State of U,P, and 2 Others

Surendra Bahadur Chaurasia vs State of Up and 2 Others

Ram Pal and 9 Others vs Union of India and 5 Others

M/S Uppal Chadha Hi Tech Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Naresh vs State of Up and 2 Others