Allahabad High Court
KAILASH AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The petition is dismissed; the petitioners must make a fresh representation to the District Level Committee as per the 2016 Government Order, and no mandamus is issued.
Summary
The petitioners, Kailash and another, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Union of India and other respondents to pay additional compensation for a parcel of land (Gata No. 756, 0.1180 hectare) in Ghazipur district and to decide a representation filed on 09‑09‑2025. The respondents argued that a 2016 Government Order provides a specific remedial mechanism: claimants must submit a representation to a District Level Committee, which will assess compensation under the 2013 land acquisition Act. The Court noted that the constitutional provisions on eminent domain (Articles 300A and 31A) require compensation, but the procedural route prescribed by the Government Order is available. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioners to file a fresh representation with the required documents before the Committee within two weeks, and the Committee must decide the claim within twelve weeks. The petition was therefore disposed of without granting mandamus.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a mandamus directing the State to pay additional compensation for land acquisition.
- Whether the petitioners must pursue the remedy provided under the 2016 Government Order and the 2013 Land Acquisition Act before seeking judicial intervention.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- eminent domain
- compensation
- mandamus
- land acquisition
- district level committee
- writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 16096 of 2026
Kailash And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Atiul Raza Khan
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Anurag Yadav, C.S.C., Paras
Nath Rai
Court No. - 21
HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J.
HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.
1. Heard Sri Atiul Raza Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri
Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-
respondents, Sri Paras Nath Rai, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
respondent no. 1 and Sri Sudheer Mishra, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of respondent nos. 4 and 5.
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 MANDAMUS
directing the respondents to pay the additional compensation to
the petitioners in respect of Gata No. 756 Chh. area 0.1180
Hectare, situated at Revenue Village Kunwarpur, Tehsil Saidpur,
District Ghazipur forthwith.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS
directing the respondents to decide the representation dated
09.09.2025 moved by the petitioners within short stipulated
period as this Hon'ble Court may deem and proper under the
facts and circumstances of the case in accordance with law."
3. At the very outset, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel informed to
the Court that for redressal of grievance of tenure holders, claiming certain
right/title over their land, the State Government had issued detailed
WRIC No. 16096 of 2026
2
Government Order dated 12.05.2016, which provides that in case the
claimant files claim supported with requisite documents, the same would be
considered by the District Level Committee for ensuring adequate
compensation in the light of Act 2013. He submits that once the efficacious
remedy is available to the petitioners, the matter should be relegated to the
District Level Committee, which may examine the claim of petitioners
within a reasonable time and submit its report to the Chairman/District
Magistrate, who may accord adequate compensation accordingly.
4. The position of law is well-established that in view of Article 300A and
31A of the Constitution of India, the owner of land can be divested only
in accordance with law after appropriately compensating, if such land is
required by the State for public purpose. Since, such power of eminent
domain is not in dispute, we need not advert the matter at this stage in
view of Government Order dated 12.05.2016.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the relief prayed
in the instant matter, we dispose of the instant petition with liberty to the
petitioners to make fresh representation along with true attested copy of the
instant order before Committee constituted under the Government Order
dated 12.05.2016 within two weeks. In the event, such representation is
made, the District Level Committee shall consider the claim of the
petitioners and ensure that the proceeding shall be finalized expeditiously,
preferably within twelve weeks, thereafter.
(Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)
May 6, 2026
Sumit S
Digitally signed by :-
SUMIT SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…