Disposed¶26

Shobha Developers through Its Proprietor Keshav Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Feb 2026WRIC/6424/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WRIT - C No. 6424 of 2026; Shobha Developers v. State of U.P. and 3 Others; Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA); e-tender notice dated 22.01.2026; License Space for Nurseries; Techzone-IV; e-tender dated 29.04.2022; Letter of Award dated 05.01.2023; encroachment by builder; forfeiture of earnest money deposit; blacklisting for five years by order dated 06.09.2024; recall of blacklisting by order dated 12.01.2026; representations dated 23.10.2024, 30.12.2025, 16.01.2026; certiorari; mandamus; matter listed fresh on 26.02.2026; no final adjudication on merits.

What the court decided

AI extract

Shobha Developers through Its Proprietor Keshav Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 6424 of 2026

¶3

Shobha Developers Through Its Proprietor Keshav Kumar

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. And 3 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashok Kumar Nigam, Rekha Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anjali Upadhya, C.S.C.

¶8

Court No. - 21

¶9

HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.

¶10

Heard Shri Ashok Kumar Nigam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the Staterespondents and Mrs. Anjali Upadhaya, learned counsel for the respondent - Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (Greater Noida).

¶11

This writ petition is preferred for the following principal reliefs:

¶12

"A. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of CERITIORARI quashing the impugned e-tender notice dated 22.01.2026 to the extent of the parcel of land mentioned at SL No.3, location of Nursery Techzone-IV.;

¶13

B. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding and directing the respondent authorities not to take any further action/step in pursuance to the e-tender notice dated 22.01.2026;

¶14

C. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding and directing the respondent authorities to give possession to the petitioner as per the letter of award dated 05.01.2023.

¶15

D. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of commanding

¶16

WRIC No. 6424 of 2026

¶17

¶18

and directing the respondent authorities to make the allotted/licensed land free from all encroachment.

¶19

E. Issue such other and further writ order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case;"

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned e-tender notice dated 22.01.2026 issued by the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority for “License Space for Nurseries” at Techzone-IV, despite the same land having already been allotted to the petitioner earlier. Pursuant to an earlier e-tender dated 29.04.2022 and the corresponding Request for Proposal for granting nursery license space for seven years, extendable by three years, the petitioner was declared the successful bidder and a Letter of Award dated 05.01.2023 was issued, which was received by the petitioner on 16.01.2023 at his correct address.

¶21

3.1. Upon inspection, the petitioner found that the allotted land was under encroachment due to temporary structures raised by a builder. The petitioner repeatedly requested the authority to clear the encroachment prior to making payment and submitted letters dated 27.01.2023, 14.02.2023 and 05.04.2023 expressing readiness to deposit the required amount once possession was handed over free from encumbrances.

¶22

3.2. In October 2024, the petitioner came to know that by order dated 06.09.2024 the authority had forfeited the earnest money deposit and blacklisted the petitioner for five years without providing any opportunity of hearing and by sending notices to a wrong address. Subsequently, by order dated 12.01.2026 the blacklisting was recalled, though forfeiture was retained. The petitioner thereafter submitted representations dated 23.10.2024, 30.12.2025 and 16.01.2026 requesting possession of the allotted land, but the encroachment still continues. He submits that despite the subsistence of the Letter of Award, the respondent authority issued a fresh e-tender dated 22.01.2026 for the very same land without cancelling the earlier allotment. He lastly submits that such situation has impelled the petitioner to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court.

¶23

WRIC No. 6424 of 2026

¶24

¶25

Before proceeding further on the merits of the case, let Mrs. Anjali Upadhaya, learned counsel for the respondent – Greater Noida, obtain instructions.

¶26

Put up this matter again as fresh on 26.02.2026.

¶27

(Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) February 17, 2026 NLY

¶28

Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shobha Developers through Its Proprietor Keshav Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shobha Developers through Its Proprietor Keshav Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Birendra Singh Alias Vrishbhanu and Another vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Reena Kumari vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Raj Kishor vs State of Up and 5 Others

Subhash and 6 Others vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 4 Others

Saurabh Prakash Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Kishor vs State of Up and 5 Others