Disposed

Ajeet Kumar v. State of Up and 2 Others

Allahabad HC7 Jan 2025WRIC/39748/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner alleged part of his agricultural land was covered by road construction without acquisition or compensation. The court directed revenue officials to demarcate his land within eight weeks and, if a shortfall exists, refer compensation determination to the District Level Committee.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No. 2 directed to demarcate petitioner's land within eight weeks; shortfall, if any, referred for compensation payment in accordance with law.

Ajeet Kumar vs State of Up and 2 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:2616-DB

¶2

Court No. - 21

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39748 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Ajeet Kumar Respondent :- State Of Up And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Srivastava,Prakash Gupta,Priyanka Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent-Authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 16.11.2024. In the said representation, the petitioner has alleged that the respondents are covering some part of his land of Gata No. 178 area 1.1420 hectare while constructing a pakka road without acquisition and payment of compensation and therefore, he should be paid compensation therefor.

¶7

In the written instructions submitted by the respondents, the stand taken is that no part of the land of the petitioner is getting affected by construction of the road. Thus, according to them, the entire area of the plot of the petitioner is available on the spot.

¶8

However, counsel for the petitioner does not accept the stand taken by the State-respondents.

¶9

Having regard to the rival contentions, we are of the opinion that interest of justice would be served in case the respondents are directed to demarcate the land of the petitioner and ensure that entire area as per revenue records is available at the spot.

¶10

Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No. 2 to constitute a team of revenue officials and get the land of the petitioner demarcated within eight weeks from the date of communication of the instant order. The revenue team will put demarcation marks and ensure that the entire area as per revenue records is available to the petitioner. In case there is any short fall, the District Magistrate will refer the matter to the District Level Committee in terms of the Government Order dated 12 May 2016 for determining compensation for the shortfall in area and pay the compensation amount to the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶11

Order Date :- 7.1.2025 Mukesh Kr.

¶12

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

¶13

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

Ajeet Kumar v. State of Up and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajeet Kumar v. State of Up 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Chandra Kala Devi vs National Highways Authority of India through Its Project Director and 2 Others

Badal Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Prashant Kumar and 4 Others vs National Highways Authority of India through Its Project Director and 2 Others

Sunil Kumar Yadav vs Union of India and 2 Others

Uma Shankar and Another vs State of Up and Another

Vikesh Kumar and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others