Allahabad High Court
SMT MEENA KUMARI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the petitioners must be allowed to file fresh representations and that no coercive action shall be taken pending the respondent's decision.
Summary
The petitioners, owners of houses along State Highway No. 21, challenged a notice dated 26‑06‑2025 issued by the fifth respondent ordering demolition of their properties to facilitate highway widening. They sought a writ of certiorari to quash the notice and a mandamus to restrain demolition. The respondents argued that the petitioners could be given a chance to reply to the notice before any coercive action. The Court agreed that allowing the petitioners to submit fresh representations would serve the ends of justice and ordered that no demolition or other coercive action be taken for five weeks or until a decision is made. The petitioners were directed to file individual representations within one week, and the fifth respondent was to consider them within four weeks. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed with these procedural directions.
Issues considered
- Whether the show‑cause notice dated 26‑06‑2025 ordering demolition can be quashed.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to restrain demolition of the petitioners' houses.
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to a hearing before any coercive action is taken.
Subjects
- writ petition
- certiorari
- mandamus
- highway widening
- show cause notice
- natural justice
- land acquisition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 10406 of 2026
Smt Meena Kumari And 2 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ram Kishor Gupta
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 21
HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J.
HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.
1. Heard Shri Ram Kishor Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners and
Shri Devesh Vikram, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for State
respondents.
2. The instant writ petition has been preferred praying inter alia for the
following relief:
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing
the impugned notice dated 26.6.2025 (Annexure-Goldmiss 1,2 and 3 to
the writ petition) issued by respondent no.5 to the petitioner no. 1,2 and 3.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
the respondents not to demolish the house and shops situated at Bilraya
Panwari Marg (State Highway 21) KM 428, 429, 430 belonging to the
petitioner no. 1,2 and 3.
(iii) Issue any other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble court may
deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.
(iv) To award the cost of writ petition to the petitioners."
3. The case of the petitioners is that their houses are situated along State
Highway No. 21. The respondents are intending to widen the highway
and in the process, they are threatening to demolish their houses.
WRIC No. 10406 of 2026
2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that similar
controversy has earlier been raised in Writ-C No.20360 of 2025 (Ram
Asrey & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors.) in which the Court has accorded
indulgence and as such it is submitted that being on similar footing the
petitioners are also entitled for similar indulgence.
5. Learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel submits that in case, any reply
is submitted by the petitioners in response to the impugned notices dated
26.6.2025, the respondent will decide the same before taking any coercive
action.
6. We are of the opinion that granting opportunity to the petitioners to
submit their reply in response to the impugned notices before any action
is taken would sub-serve the ends of justice.
7. Accordingly, we dispose of the instant writ petition as follows:
(i) The petitioners will have one week from today to file fresh
individual representations alongwith supporting evidence.
(ii) The 5th respondent, who has issued the impugned notices,
will consider the representations alongwith evidence annexed
within a period of next four weeks.
(iii) For a period of five weeks or decision in the proceedings,
whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken on the
basis of impugned show cause notices. The impugned show
cause notices would abide by the decision taken by the 5th
respondent in compliance of the instant order.
(Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)
March 19, 2026
NLY
Digitally signed by :-
NAND LAL YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…