Disposed¶14

Smt. Jaiwati v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2026WRIC/7272/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

6% developed abadi land; allotment to land owner whose acquired land (Khasra No.222, 0.5060 hect., Revenue Village Sirsa, Pargana Dankaur, Tehsil Sadar, District Gautam Budh Nagar) was taken; Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority; writ petition disposed of without entering merits; issue required factual enquiry; direction to file fresh representation within two weeks; respondent authority to decide by reasoned and speaking order within six weeks; no statutes or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of without adjudicating the merits; petitioner permitted to file a fresh representation within two weeks and the respondent authority directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a further period of six weeks. ¶14

Smt. Jaiwati Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to allotment of 6% developed abadi land out of her acquired land in Khasra No.222 measuring 0.5060 hect. of Revenue Village Sirsa, Pargana Dankaur, Tehsil Sadar, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶11

Court's answer

The issue raised in the writ petition requires a factual enquiry; the Court declined to enter into the merits of the petitioner's claim.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

Petitioner directed to file a fresh representation before the respondent authority within two weeks from the date of the order, along with a copy of the order.

¶13

Key takeaways

Respondent authority is under obligation to take an expeditious decision on the representation by passing a reasoned and speaking order strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a further period of six weeks.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (Division Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Kunal Ravi Singh, JJ.) in Writ - C No. - 7272 of 2026, Smt. Jaiwati v. State of U.P. and 2 Others (decided February 23, 2026) — Land allotment — 6% developed abadi land — Petitioner claimed allotment of 6% developed abadi land out of her acquired land in Khasra No.222 measuring 0.5060 hect. of Revenue Village Sirsa, Pargana Dankaur, Tehsil Sadar, District Gautam Budh Nagar. Holding that the issue raised required a factual enquiry, the Court, without entering into the merits, disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent authority within two weeks along with a copy of the order, and directed the authority to take an expeditious decision by passing a reasoned and speaking order strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a further period of six weeks.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 7272 of 2026

Smt. Jaiwati

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 2 Others

¶7

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Ganga Dhar Shukla .....Respondent(s)
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 learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Ms. Ishita Sand holding brief of Mrs. Anjali Upadhaya, learned counsel for the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (in short "Authority").

¶11

The petitioner herein claims allotment of 6% developed abadi land out of her acquired land in Khasra No.222 measuring 0.5060 hect. of Revenue Village Sirsa, Pargana Dankaur, Tehsil Sadar, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶12

The issue raised herein would require a factual enquiry.

¶13

Without entering into the merits of the case, we direct that the petitioner shall file a fresh representation before the respondent authority within two weeks from today along with a copy of this order and the respondent authority is under obligation to take an expeditious decision by passing a reasoned and speaking order strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a further period of six weeks.

¶14

The writ petition is disposed of , accordingly.

¶15

(Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) February 23, 2026 SP/

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SURYA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Jaiwati v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Jaiwati v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pradeep Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Durgesh Kumar vs Union of India and 2 Other

Digvijay Raj Pandey and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. and 4 Others

Ravindra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kuverpal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ravindra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others