Allahabad High Court
SMT. MANORAMA TRIPATHIversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The petitioner has an alternative remedy under the Government Order dated 12‑May‑2016 and should pursue that for compensation.
Summary
Manorama Tripathi filed a writ petition alleging that Plot Nos. 238‑Ka and 238‑Kha in Village Bhaluhi Madaripatti were taken over by respondents without any acquisition process or compensation. The respondents argued that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy under a Government Order dated 12‑May‑2016. The Court observed that the petitioner is only seeking compensation and not the restoration of the land. Accordingly, the Court directed the petitioner to move an application under the said Government Order, which will be heard and decided within three months of receiving a certified copy of the order. The writ petition was therefore disposed of.
Issues considered
- What remedy is available to the petitioner for compensation for the alleged unauthorized taking over of land?
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- writ petition
- alternative remedy
- government order
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 13935 of 2022
Smt. Manorama Tripathi
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Adya Prasad Tewari
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., C.S.C.
Court No. - 29
HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J.
HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.
1. Instructions filed today are taken on record.
2. Grievance of the petitioner is that Plot Nos. 238-Ka and 238-Kha,
measuring 270 square meters, of Village Bhaluhi Madaripatti, Tehsil:
Kasya, District Kushinagar, have been taken over by respondent Nos.3
and 4 without any acquisition and without paying any compensation.
3. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, Shri Rajeev Gupta,
submits that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy as per the
Government Order dated 12.05.2016.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, since the petitioner
is only interested in the compensation and not in getting the land back, we
are of the considered view that, in case the petitioner moves an
application in pursuance of the Government Order dated 12.05.2016, the
same shall be considered and decided after giving due opportunity of
hearing to the petitioner within three months from the date of presentation
of a certified copy of this order.
5. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.)
September 11, 2026
NLY
Digitally signed by :-
NAND LAL YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…