Smt.Ranjana Lodhi and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing and Urban Planning Lko. and 4 Others

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 599 of 2026

¶3

Smt.Ranjana Lodhi And 4 Others

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing And Urban Planning Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Km. Vishwa Mohini, Rajesh Kumar, Vimal Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ratnesh Chandra

¶7

Court No. - 3

¶8

HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J.

¶9

Heard Shri Vimal Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State and Shri Anurag Srivastava alongwith Shri Aadi Nigam, Advocate holding brief of Shri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the U.P. Awas Awam Vikas Parishad.

¶10

This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein the writ petitioner has sought for the following substantial relief:-

¶11

"1. That a writ, order or direction, in the nature of Mandamus, thereby commanding the respondents authorities, to pay compensation towards acquired land of the petitioners under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 of the acquired land as per the Land Pooling Policy being issued by the Government of Uttar Pradesh, as the O.P. No.2 issued Notification under Section-28 of U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam for development of some villages of city Lucknow, for creation of 'Nai Jail Road Bhumi Vikas Awam Grahsthan Yojna, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow in pursuance of Land Pooling Policy of the Government of Uttar Pradesh.

¶12

ii. That a writ, order or direction, in the nature of Mandamus, thereby commanding the respondents authorities, to restrain the illegal, arbitrary, malafide and discriminatory action of the respondent authorities whereby without following any due process/procedure provided under the Act, 2013, and Land Pooling Policy of Government of Uttar Pradesh, the respondents authorities are acquired and take forcible possession of the land of the petitioners for creation of project 'Nai Jail Road Bhumi Vikas Awam Grahsthan Yojna, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow in which neither any notice is served over the petitioners as per the provisions of Section-29 of

¶13

WRIC No. 599 of 2026

¶14

2

¶15

the U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965, nor the objection of the petitioners were considered by the respondents authorities.

¶16

iii. To issue any other suitable order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem, fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, in favour of the petitioners.

¶17

iv. To award the cost, of the writ petition in favour of the petitioners against the Opp. Parties."

¶18

It transpires from the facts that the matter is pending before the Additional District Magistrate/ Special Land Acquisition Officer for making the award.

¶19

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State and the U.P. Awas Awam Vikas Parishad have reassured this Court that the award that is to be passed under Section 23 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, shall be passed expeditiously and any procedural issues shall be coordinated between the State and the U.P. Awas Awam Vikas Parishad.

¶20

In light of the above, we direct the respondent No.4, being the Additional District Magistrate/ Special Land Acquisition Officer, Lucknow, to pass the award within a period of eight weeks from date and once the award is passed, compensation should be paid to the petitioner, if she is so entitled, expeditiously, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of passing of the said award. Earlier the Special Land Acquisition Officer vide his letter dated 17.10.2025 has sought information from the Awas Awam Vikas Parishad for providing the entire information including total land to be acquired, to which the Executive Engineer vide his letter dated 18.11.2025 has tendered all the information.

¶21

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of .

¶22

February 3, 2026 Satish

¶23

(Manjive Shukla,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.)

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt.Ranjana Lodhi and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing and Urban Planning Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Ranjana Lodhi and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing and Urban Planning Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devimaashakti Constructions and Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Duly Auth. Ayush Sinha vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry. of Railways New Delhi and 4 Others

Vimlesh Kumar Tripathi vs U.O.I. Thru. Secy. Minstry of Petroleum New Delhi and 4 Others

Ajay Pal Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

M/S Ashwini Rice Mill.Thru. Proprietor Dinesh Kumar Pathak vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Institutional Finance Lko. and Another

Musheer vs U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board Thru. Its Chairman and Another

Guddi vs State of U.P. Thru. Commissioner Secy. Board Revenue and 2 Others