Allahabad High Court
WRIC/24030/2026 of VIJAY AGNIHOTRI AND 4 OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS on 4 October 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 24030 of 2026 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Shri Rajan Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Hare Ram Tripathi, learned standing counsel appearing for the State-respondents and Shri Anand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 24030 of 2026
Court No. - 29
HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J.
HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Shri Rajan Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Hare Ram Tripathi, learned standing counsel appearing for the State-respondents and Shri Anand Prakash Paul, learned counsel appearing for Kanpur Development Authority.
2. The petitioners' land, bearing Plot Nos. 35 and 56, admeasuring one bigha and seven biswas, situated at Village Jamaui, Sarai Meeta, District Kanpur Nagar, was acquired. Thereafter, by means of the award dated 08.08.1967, an amount of Rs. 5,34,691.48 was awarded to the various tenure-holders. Possession over the land was taken on 16.08.1967.
3. After a lapse of about 59-60 years from the acquisition proceedings, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking release of the land/house property. From the counter-affidavit itself, it transpires that the entire area of Plot Nos. 35 and 56 was taken into possession on 16.08.1967. In view thereof, the instant writ petition cannot be entertained at this belated stage.
4. Learned Standing Counsel submits that the prayer for release of the land can't be granted by the Authority and the same can only be granted by State Government under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. However, the records do not reflect that any such application has been filed by the petitioners. Furthermore, such a claim at such a belated stage cannot be made.
5. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that, in case the petitioners approach the State Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajan Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anand Prakash Paul, C.S.C. Vijay Agnihotri And 4 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
Government by filing a representation under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as it stood applicable at the time of acquisition, along with a certified copy of this order, within a period of ten days from today, the same shall be considered and decided by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months thereafter.
6. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. October 5, 2026 Mukesh Kr. WRIC No. 24030 of 2026 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MUKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad