Allahabad High Court
ASHOK KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the petition must be dismissed pending a fresh representation by the petitioner, after which the District Level Committee shall decide the compensation claim within the prescribed time.
Summary
The petitioner, Ashok Kumar, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State respondents to pay compensation for his land that became unusable after being submerged by the Chaudhary Charan Singh Rasin Dam. He also asked the court to order the respondents to decide his compensation application dated 25-06-2025 within a fixed time. The petitioner relied on a prior decision in Writ‑C No.25521 of 2022, where a coordinate bench directed a District Level Committee to adjudicate a similar claim under a Government Order dated 12.05.2016. The State respondents did not oppose the relief sought. The court, without expressing any view on the merits, dismissed the petition but allowed the petitioner to file a fresh representation with a true attested copy of the relevant order, after which the District Level Committee must consider the claim within twelve weeks, ensuring a hearing for the petitioner. The decision thus emphasizes procedural compliance before substantive adjudication of compensation.
Issues considered
- Whether the State respondents are liable to pay compensation for land submerged due to the construction of the Chaudhary Charan Singh Rasin Dam.
- Whether the court can issue a mandamus directing the respondents to decide the petitioner’s compensation application within a stipulated period.
- Whether the petitioner must be given an opportunity to file a fresh representation with the required documents before the District Level Committee can adjudicate the claim.
Subjects
- Compensation
- Land Submergence
- Dam Construction
- Mandamus
- Writ Petition
- Government Order 12.05.2016
- District Level Committee
- Procedural Compliance
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 10433 of 2026
Ashok Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar Pandey, Jaideep Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 21
HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J.
HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Akhileshwar Singh,
learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State-
respondents.
2. The instant writ petition has been preferred praying inter alia for the
following relief:
"1-Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding the respondents (specially the respondent no. 3) to ensure
the payment compensation to the petitioner in respect to the land in
question, which has became useless for the cultivatory proposes of the
petitioner because of its submerged due to construction of Dam, namely
Chaudhary Charan Singh Rasin Dam, Chitrakoot within stipulated period
of time.
II-Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding the respondents (specially the respondent no. to 3) to decide
the petitioner's application dated 25-06-2025 for grant of compensation
within a stipulated period of time.
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- Award cost of the writ petition to the petitioner."
WRIC No. 10433 of 2026
2
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in identical facts and
circumstances a Coordinate Bench in Writ-C No.25521 of 2022 directed
District Level Committee to decide the claim of the petitioners in terms of
Government Order dated 12.05.2016. He submits that similar direction be
issued in the instant case also.
4. Shri Akhileshwar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel
appearing for the State-respondents has no objection to the same.
5. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits, the instant
petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh
representation alongwith true attested copy of the instant order before
respondent no.2 within two weeks from today and in which event,
respondent no.2 shall place the representation before the Chairman of the
Committee envisaged under Government Order dated 12.05.2016 for
being decided within next twelve weeks, in accordance with law. Before
taking any decision, the petitioner shall be afforded opportunity of
hearing.
(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…