Allahabad High Court
WRIC/30061/2025 of KASHI RAM AND 2 OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 8 OTHERS on 17 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 30061 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Supplementary Affidavit filed today be kept on record. 2. Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Srivastava learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pranjal Mehrotra learned counsel
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 30061 of 2025
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. Supplementary Affidavit filed today be kept on record.
2. Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Srivastava learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pranjal Mehrotra learned counsel for the Awas Vikash Parishad, U.P., Lucknow, and the learned Standing Counsel.
3. For the same relief which has been made in this writ petition, a civil suit has been filed being Original Suit No. 306 of 2005. The prayer no. 1 of the writ petition is that the respondent - Awas Vikas be restrained from selling the agricultural land comprised in plot no. 193 area 0.534 hectare. A further prayer is that no construction be made on the plot in question. Likewise, the prayer is the civil suit was that the defendant Awas Vikas be injuncted from interfering in the possession of the petitioner. In effect, we find that the prayers made both in the writ petition and in the suit are of a similar nature.
4. Thus, we are of the view that the writ petition cannot be entertained simply on the ground that a civil suit for the same relief is already pending.
5. The Petitioner may, thus, continue to pursue the remedy as has been availed of by filing of the civil suit.
6. After the Court showed its disinclination to entertain the petition, Sri Depak Kumar Srivastava prayed that if any acquisition has actually been Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Deepak Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : Pranjal Mehrotra, C.S.C., Vineet Pandey Kashi Ram And 2 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 8 Others .....Respondent(s)
done of the land in question then the petitioner may be paid the requisite compensation.
7. It is needless to observe that, if any acquisition has been made, the petitioner can always approach the relevant authority for the release of compensation.
8. With these observations, the writ petition is finally disposed of. September 18, 2026 PK WRIC No. 30061 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad