Allahabad High Court
Guljari Lal And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 19 August, 2025
Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:141559-DB
Court No. - 29
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15193 of 2025
Petitioner :- Guljari Lal and 3 others
Respondent :- State of U.P. and 3 others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Mishra, Tanya Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
With
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35584 of 2024
Petitioner :- Guljari Lal and another
Respondent :- State of UP and 3 others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Mishra,Shivam Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
With
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35581 of 2024
Petitioner :- Kalavati and another
Respondent :- State of U.P. and 3 athers
Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Mishra,Tanya Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.
1. Heard Ms. Shambhavi Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Suresh Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents and perused the material available on record.
2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, all the three connected petitions have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.
3. The Writ C No.15193 of 2025 has been filed, inter alia, claiming following reliefs:-
"(a). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned award dated 09.12.2024 (Annexure No.10) as well as order dated 09.12.2024 (Annexure No.11) passed by respondent No.3, whereby, objections filed by the petitioner has been rejected.
(b). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to provide fair compensation to the petitioners for their land comprising arazi Nos.137, 147, 124 and 125 as per market value (not less comprising arazi Nos.137, 147, 124 and 125 as per market value (not less than Rs.9500/sq. meter) and to implement rehabilitation and resettlement (R & R) measures under Chapter V of the Act, 2013."
4. Writ C Nos.35584 of 2024 and 35581 of 2024 have been filed praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to refrain from acquiring the houses and land or proceeding with any demolition activities over the land of the petitioners without giving proper compensation as per the circle rate. Further relief has been claimed seeking a direction to first verify the title of the land in question and then proceed to utilize the same for road widening. A direction restraining carrying out construction/excavation work has also been prayed for.
5. Interim orders dated 25.10.2024 were passed in both the aforesaid writ petitions i.e. restraining dispossession of the petitioners or altering status of the petitioners vis-a-vis land proposed to be acquired. The reasoning assigned in the interim orders was based upon the submissions made that even before the date fixed for hearing as per the notices issued to the petitioners, the respondents were trying to dispossess them. The interim orders were extended from time to time and have remained operative till today. It is on account of the interim orders that the petitioners' possession and the structures standing on the spot have remained protected. However, an award was declared subsequent to passing of the interim order. The same has been challenged in Writ C No.15193 of 2025. The matter has been considered in its entirety.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently submits that the action of acquiring land as well as determination of award is perse illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short 'the Act of 2013'). Reliance was placed on various documents on record to demonstrate as if the provisions of Sections 15 and 21 of the Act of 2013 were not complied with and, therefore, it is urged that the award is liable to be set aside.
7. As far as the second relief in Writ C No.15193 of 2025 is concerned, submissions have been made that lesser amount has been determined as compensation and the respondents have not properly analyzed the nature of property acquired by them as well as the correct market value thereof.
8. Shri Suresh Singh, learned A.C.S.C. has advanced two-fold objections:-
(i) Firstly, in the instant matter, award has been passed under the Act of 2013 and prior to passing of the award, objections under Section 21(1) of the Act, 2013 had also been decided by the Authority on 07.12.2024 and;
(ii). The petitioners were accorded opportunity of hearing on 07.12.2024 and the objections had been considered in detail and, accordingly, award was passed after two days on 09.12.2024 and, as such, the award impugned does not call for any interference.
9. Shri Singh further submits that insofar as relief no.2 in Writ C No.15193 of 2025 is concerned, the petitioners have remedy to apply for making a Reference under Section 64 of the Act of 2013. He also submits that in case the petitioners appear before the Authority and complete requisite formalities, the amount of compensation so quantified in terms of the award would be released in their favour.
10. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and factual and legal matrix of the instant case, we do not think it to be a fit case to interfere with the award dated 09.12.2024 passed by respondent No.3-Special Land Acquisition Officer, District-Prayagraj in view of the material on record where objections filed by the petitioners were decided after hearing them.
11. As the petitioners are aggrieved by the determination of lesser amount of compensation, the remedy of making Reference to the concerned Authority lies under Section 64 of the Act of 2013.
12. Here we propose to accord benefit of lis pendens in favour of the petitioners on account of pendency of the said three writ petitions and direct that in case an application is made by the petitioners within a period of two weeks from today, in terms of Section 64, the same shall be treated to be well within time.
13. The petitioners are also directed to complete all the requisite formalities and appear before the concerned Authority on 25.08.2025 along with requisite papers. As the amount of compensation has already been quantified in terms of the award, the Authorities are directed to release the amount of compensation in favour of the petitioners immediately.
14. In the interest of justice, as the petitioners are using the property in question for residential purposes, breathing time of three weeks is accorded to them to vacate the same.
15. With the above observations and directions, all the writ petitions stand disposed of.
Order Date :- 19.8.2025
Jyotsana
(Kshitij Shailendra, J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J.)
