Allahabad High Court
WRIC/38335/2026 of LILA SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS on 22 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 38335 of 2026 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Shri M.C. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 3 & 4 and learned counsel appearing on behalf of
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 38335 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 M.C. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 3 & 4 and learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2.
2. Challenge has been raised to the order dated 21.04.2022 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, whereby the application filed under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the "Act, 1894") has been rejected on a highly technical ground.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon the order dated 22.09.2022 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ-C No. 23460 of 2022 (Ram Prakash vs. State of U.P. and 3 others), wherein the Special Land Acquisition Officer had rejected an application under Section 28-A of the Act, 1894 on the highly technical ground that the same had been preferred beyond the prescribed period by 9 days. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Coordinate Bench allowed the writ petition and relegated the matter to the competent authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
4. It is contended that though the land acquisition reference was decided by the competent Court on 04.04.2012 and the compensation in respect of the land in question was finalized, the petitioners moved an application under Section 28-A of the Act, 1894 on 17.07.2012. Learned counsel for the petitioners, in this backdrop, submits that in the instant case, the application under Section 28-A of the Act, 1894 was preferred with a Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dushyant Singh, Mahesh Chand Counsel for Respondent(s) : Agarwal Archi Piyush, Anuj Pratap Singh, C.S.C. Lila Singh And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
delay of 14 days. It is thus contended that the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by the aforesaid order and, therefore, similar indulgence may be extended in favour of the petitioners.
5. Be that as it may, a perusal of the record indicates that the petitioners were not aware of the award passed by the Reference Court on 04.04.2012.
6. After getting the award, if the petitioners moved an application by delay of 14 days, it should have been condoned by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. The rejection order, being highly technical is, therefore, set aside. The writ petition is allowed.
7. The matter is relegated back to the Competent Authority for fresh decision in accordance with law. September 23, 2026 Irshad WRIC No. 38335 of 2026 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- IRSHAD AHMAD SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad