WRIC/39318/2026 of GANGA PRASAD AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS on 28 September 2026

1. Heard Shri Ramakant Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed inter alia for the following relief:- "I. To Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to immediately stop all further construction work road or interference over the petitioner's private land so for Gata No. 212 measuring area 0.0690 hectares, located at Village- Raswadiya, Tehsil- Mariyahun, District- Jaunpur.

II. To Issue a writ, order, or direction in the narure or Mandamus commanding the Respondents to entire initiate formal land acquisition proceedings and disburse full statutory compensation / market value along with solarium to the petitioners and proforma respondents in accordance with and under the right to fair compensation and transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013 within a stipulated time-frame, or alternatively, to restore the land to its original tenure- holders/petitioners and proforma respondents in the interest of justice."

3. At the very outset, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel informed the Court that for redressal of grievance of tenure holders, claiming certain right/title over their land, the State Government had issued a detailed Government Order dated 12.05.2016, which provides that in case the claimant files claim supported with requisite documents, the same would be considered by the District Level Committee for ensuring adequate compensation in the light of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short the 'Act 2013'). He further submits that once the efficacious remedy is available to the petitioners, the matter should be relegated to the District Level Committee, which may examine the claim of petitioners within a reasonable time and submit its report to the Chairman/District Magistrate, who may accord adequate compensation accordingly. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ramakant Tiwari, Umesh Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ganga Prasad And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s)

4. The position of law is well-established that in view of Article 300A and 31A of the Constitution of India, the owner of the land can be divested only in accordance with law after appropriately compensating, if such land is required by the State for public purpose. Since such power of eminent domain is not in dispute, we need not advert the matter at this stage in view of Government order dated 12.05.2016.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the relief prayed in the instant matter, we dispose of the instant petition with liberty to the petitioners to make fresh representation along with true attested copy of the instant order before District Level Committee constituted under the Government Order dated 12.05.2016 within two weeks. In the event, such representation is made, the District Level Committee shall consider the claim of the petitioner and ensure that the proceeding shall be finalised expeditiously, preferably within twelve weeks, thereafter. September 29, 2026 vijay krishna WRIC No. 39318 of 2026 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KRISHNA JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad