Allahabad High Court
CHUNNI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner must be given an opportunity to file objections and that the competent authority shall decide the matter after hearing, leading to the disposal of the petition.
Summary
The petitioner, an elderly SC/ST widow, was allotted a dwelling under the Manyawar Shri Kanshiram Ji Shahri Garib Awas Yojna but was served an eviction notice by the Prayagraj Development Authority (PDA) without a hearing. She challenged the notice, seeking quashing of the order and mandamus for reconstruction and compensation. The PDA argued that the petitioner was not residing in the unit and that objections could be considered if filed. The Court examined the scheme's purpose, the lack of a hearing, and the petitioner's right to natural justice. It directed that the petitioner may file detailed objections within two weeks, after which the competent authority must decide within eight weeks, maintaining the status quo pending such objections. The writ petition was consequently disposed without granting the reliefs sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the eviction notice issued by the PDA without affording a hearing violates principles of natural justice.
- Whether the petitioner’s allocation under the Manyawar Shri Kanshiram Ji Shahri Garib Awas Yojna protects her from eviction despite non‑residence.
- Whether the Court should grant certiorari and mandamus to quash the notice and order reconstruction and compensation.
Subjects
- eviction
- natural justice
- housing scheme
- SC/ST welfare
- writ petition
- certiorari
- mandamus
- status quo
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 28937 of 2025
Chunni Devi
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anay Kumar Srivastava, Ravi Prakash Mishra,
Samir Srivastava, Sanjeev Kumar Singh,
Saurabh Shukla
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Vibhu Rai
Court No. - 21
HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J.
HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.
1. Heard Shri Anay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner,
Shri Gopal Chandra Saxena, learned Standing Counsel, and Shri Vibhu Rai,
learned counsel appearing for Prayagraj Development Authority (for short,
"PDA").
2. While entertaining the writ petition on 9 January 2026, this Court had
directed the respondents to furnish detailed instructions. For the sake of
convenience, the order dated 9 January 2026 is reproduced below:
"1. Heard Sri Anay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner,
Sri Suresh Singh and Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief
Standing Counsels for the State respondents and Sri Vibhu Rai, learned
counsel representing Development Authority.
2. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition for the following relief
:-
"(i) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari
quashing the impugned order/notice no. Nil (undated) issued
by respondent no. 5 (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition) ;
(ii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus
directing the respondent no. 1 to reconstruct the boundary
illegally demolished by the respondent no.3 and other
officials of the respondent no. 1 and to also compensate the
petitioner to the tune of Rs. 2.0 lacs along with interest till
the date of actual payment and also to take the strict action
WRIC No. 28937 of 2025
2
against the respondent No. 3 and other officials
accompanying the respondent no. 3 when the illegal
demolition of the boundary wall of the petitioner's house has
taken place on 22.03.2025;"
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the State Government
had floated a scheme known as "Manyawar Shri Kashi Ramji Shahri
Ghareeb Awas Yojna" vide Government Order dated 04.12.2009. The
petitioner being an old and infirm widow lady, who falls under the SC/ST
category, was allotted small housing dwelling unit having Flat No. 30/14,
IIIrd Floor, Mohalla Devghat Avas Yojna, Tehsil Sadar, District -
Allahabad (now Prayagraj) on 04.11.2011. Now by means of the notice,
the petitioner is being evicted from the allotted house.
4. We have perused the documents available on record and before we
proceed further in the matter, let the entire scheme and object be placed
before this Court on the next date fixed.
5. Put up this matter again as fresh on 28.01.2026."
3. In pith and substance, it is contended that the PDA, without affording any
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in the instant proceedings, has served
the impugned notice upon her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, belonging to
the weaker section of society, was allotted a small dwelling unit bearing Flat
No. 30/14, IIIrd Floor, Mohalla Devghat Awas Yojna, Tehsil Sadar, District
Prayagraj on 29.11.2011 under the scheme floated by the State Government
known as "Manyawar Shri Kanshiram Ji Shahri Garib Awas Yojna" vide
Government Order dated 04.12.2009. It is further submitted that on account
of her ailment, the petitioner was not residing in the said dwelling unit at the
relevant point of time, and during the alleged survey it was incorrectly
presumed that the petitioner had created third-party rights over the disputed
property. The entire action of the respondents is per se arbitrary,
unsustainable in the eye of law, and violative of the principles of natural
justice.
5. Learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of the instructions, submits that
the object of the scheme is to provide shelter/small dwelling units only to
persons belonging to the weaker sections of society. He further submits that
the scheme does not permit creation of third-party interest in the allotted
dwelling unit. Upon a survey being conducted, it was found that the
WRIC No. 28937 of 2025
3
petitioner was not residing in the allotted premises and, consequently, the
impugned notice came to be issued. However, learned Standing Counsel
submits that in case the petitioner submits detailed objections before
respondent No. 2, Secretary, PDA, the same shall be duly considered and a
final order shall be passed in accordance with law.
6. Having considered the material available on record, it is apparent that the
petitioner was allotted a small dwelling unit under the scheme known as
"Manyawar Shri Kanshiram Ji Shahri Garib Awas Yojna". It further appears
that at the relevant point of time the petitioner was not residing in the
allotted flat as she was undergoing treatment for her ailment elsewhere, and
consequently the impugned notice came to be issued.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view
that the ends of justice would be adequately served by providing that, in case
the petitioner prefers detailed objections within two weeks from today, the
competent authority shall consider and decide the same expeditiously,
preferably within a period of eight weeks thereafter, strictly in accordance
with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Till
disposal of the said objections, the parties shall maintain status quo as on
date.
8. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
May 14, 2026
Mukesh Kr.
(Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MUKESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…