Counsel for v. Akanksha Gaur, C.S.C., Swetashwa Agarwal

1. Heard Ms. Monika Vaish, learned counsel for the petitioner in WRIT-C No. 26143 of 2025; Shri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner in WRIT-C No. 26614 of 2025; Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State respondents; Shri Vaibhav Tripathi for respondent - Union of India; Ms. Akanksha Gaur for the respondent - National Highway Authority of India (in short "NHAI"); and Shri H.R. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Pradeep Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the respondent no.6-Housing Society.

2. Since both writ petitions raise a common issue regarding disbursement of compensation for Plot Nos. 139-A and 143 (part of Gata Nos. 984, 986, and 1003) situated in Village Bagdaudhi Kachhar, Tehsil and District Kanpur Nagar, acquired for the NH-91 Road Widening Project, with consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same have been heard together and are being decided by this common order. 2 WRIC No. 26143 of 2025

3. Shri H.R. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Pradeep Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the respondent no.6-Housing Society files affidavits in both the writ petitions, which are taken on record. Shri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner in WRIT-C No. 26614 of 2025 also files an affidavit in the said writ petition, which is also taken on record.

4. Both the aforesaid writ petitions have been preferred for a direction to respondents to forthwith release and disburse lawful compensation to the petitioners for Plot No.139-A and Plot No.143 (originally part of Gata Nos.984, 986, 1003) situated in Village Bagdaudhi Kachhar, Tehsil and District Kanpur Nagar acquired under Road Widening Project of NH-91 and for a further direction to respondents to decide the representations of the petitioners made in this regard within a stipulated period.

5. At the admission stage, while entertaining WRIT-C No. 26143 of 2025, the Division Bench has passed the following order: "1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Ajit Singh, learned Standing Counsel for State respondents; Shri Vaibhav Tripathi for respondent no.1 and Ms. Akanksha Gaur for National Highway Authority of India (in short "NHAI").

2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for a direction to respondents to forthwith release and disburse lawful compensation to the petitioner for Plot No.143 (originally part of Gata Nos.984, 986, 1003) situated in Village Bagdaudhi Kachhar, Tehsil and District Kanpur Nagar acquired under Road Widening Project of NH-91 and for a further direction to respondents to decide the representations of the petitioner made in this regard within stipulated period.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was member of Ramganga Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti Limited having its office at Naramau, G.T. Road, Kanpur Nagar, which is registered under the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965. The society had executed a lease deed in favour of the petitioner for Plot No.143 measuring approximately 229.9 sq. mtrs. (approximately 275 sq. yards) on

24.03.2006. The layout plan of the land was duly approved by Kanpur Development Authority (in short "KDA") vide letter dated 07.06.1988 pursuant to issuance of No-Objection Certificate (NOC) by KDA dated 20.03.1979. The land was specifically demarcated as Plot No.143 for residential use as part of the Society's Development Scheme. The petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.2,10,250/- towards lease premium, in addition to development charges and boundary wall charges. He has also paid stamp duty of Rs.13,800/- in accordance with prevailing circle rate fixed by the District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar. Admittedly the land was 3 WRIC No. 26143 of 2025 acquired by NHAI.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once it is not in dispute that the lease deed was executed by the Cooperative Society in favour of the petitioner and actual consideration had also been passed on to the Cooperative Society way back, then at this stage, once land has been acquired by NHAI for road widening project, the compensation is to be released in favour of the petitioner, as there is no other impediment in this regard.

5. Confronted with this, learned counsel for NHAI prays for adjournment for seeking appropriate instructions. Similar request has also been made by learned Standing Counsel. On their request, put up this matter as fresh on 27.08.2025."

6. Shri H.R. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent no.6 submits that the respondent No.6 - Ramganga Sahakari Grih Nirman Samiti Limited is a primary housing cooperative society duly registered under the provisions of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965. Its registration number is 179, dated 17.04.1979. The principal object of the society is to acquire land, obtain the required layout plan approval, and distribute residential plots of various sizes, i.e. 200, 250, 300, and 400 square yards, to its members for the construction of residential houses. The society has 297 individual members, forming its General Body.

7. Shri H.R. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent no.6 further submits that to achieve its purpose, the society initially submitted an application on 10.03.1979 to the Executive Engineer (Planning), Kanpur Development Authority (KDA), seeking a No-Objection Certificate for purchasing specific land parcels, Plot Nos. 599, 600, 601, 602, 603, and 604, situated in village Bagdaudhi Kachhar. The KDA communicated through a letter dated 20.03.1979, stating that while the village lay outside the Kanpur Nagar Mahapalika limits, it was within the jurisdiction of KDA. However, as no master plan had yet been prepared for that area, the Authority had no objection to the society purchasing the said land. Following this, the society purchased several plots of land in village Bagdaudhi Kachhar and Pargahi Kachhar, Kanpur, through registered sale deeds executed between 1979 and 1981 by various sellers. The society prepared and submitted a layout plan, which was subsequently approved by the KDA. Residential plots of various sizes were allotted to its members as per the approved layout plan.

8. He further argues that later, the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) initiated acquisition proceedings under the National Highways Act, 1956 (in short 'the Act, 1956'), which affected the society's land. A notification under Section 3A(1) was issued on 09.02.2018, published in Times of India and Dainik Jagran on 04.08.2018, covering the village Bagdaudhi Kachhar. The declaration under Section 3D followed 4 WRIC No. 26143 of 2025 on 21.12.2018. The Additional District Magistrate (Land Acquisition), Kanpur Nagar then made an award dated 27.08.2020, determining compensation for several plots owned by the society, including plots in question of the petitioners, i.e. Plot Nos. 984, 986, and 1003.

9. Shri H.R. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel submits that admittedly, most of the land of the respondent No.6 - the Society had been utilized by the NHAI for laying a four lane road, and adequate compensation had not been accorded. He submits that even though the respondent No.6 has not instituted any separate proceedings, the respondent No.6 - the Society is inclined to institute separate proceedings regarding its grievance as it is claimed that the compensation had been deposited but on the spot, the excess land of the respondent No.6 had been utilized by the NHAI. He further submits that as the respondent No.6 is a necessary party and even if in response to the order passed by this court, it had been impleaded as a party, the respondent No.6 - the Society has a separate cause of action and is inclined to press the relief in separate proceedings and leave may be accorded to it to agitate before the competent authority regarding its grievance.

10. Learned counsels for the petitioners, in this backdrop state that as the respondent No.6 has also turned up in the instant proceedings and the petitioners are members of the respondent No.6 - the Society, and admittedly, the land in question had been acquired for laying a four lane road, adequate compensation is to be ensured to the petitioners as they are aggrieved with the disbursement of compensation.

11. Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State respondents submits that as disputed facts have been pressed before this court and the respondent No.6 has, till date, not agitated, and rights of the respondent No.6 have not been crystallized yet, in absence thereof, rights of the individual members of the respondent No.6 cannot be crystallized as they cannot claim better right than that of the respondent No.6. He submits that it cannot be said that they are the members of the society and they are also entitled to compensation, and in case law permits, the grievance of the society would be addressed in accordance with law. He further submits that the State Government had issued a detailed Government Order dated

12.05.2016, which provides that in case the claimant files a 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 the claim of the petitioners as well as the respondent No.6 - the Society would be redressed by the District Level Committee.

12. Similar objection has also been taken by Ms. Akanksha Gaur, learned counsel for the NHAI. She submits on the basis of instructions that admittedly the acquisition took place, whatever amount has been quantified by the SLAO, the same is already deposited and at this stage, she is not in a position to acknowledge the claim set up by the petitioners. However, as adequate compensation has already been deposited to the 5 WRIC No. 26143 of 2025 SLAO, the said aspect can very well be verified by the SLAO and she has no objection, in case the matter is relegated to the District Level Committee in view of the Government Order dated 12.05.2016.

13. Considering the factual situation, at first hand, we are not inclined to adjudicate the matter on merits at this stage. However, since the Society has now appeared in these proceedings, the claims raised by the petitioners vis-à-vis the Society and the NHAI can appropriately be examined by the District Level Committee. As both the writ petitions have been filed by individual members and the respondent No.6 – the Society has not instituted any independent proceedings for its own claim, we refrain from making any observation on the rights of the respondent No.6 – the Society in the absence of any determination by a competent forum or court. Undoubtedly, the rights of the petitioners, being members of the Society, would flow from and depend upon the rights recognized in law of the respondent No.6 – the Society itself.

14. In the interest of justice, we consider it appropriate that the parties shall submit their respective claims before the District Level Committee within three weeks from today. The District Level Committee shall consider and decide the claims of the respondent No.6 – the Society as well as its individual members, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all concerned, including the revenue authorities, the Kanpur Development Authority, and the members of the Society. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.

15. With the aforesaid observations and directions, both the aforementioned writ petitions stand disposed of. October 13, 2025 NLY (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard Ms. Monika Vaish, learned counsel for the petitioner in WRIT-C No. 26143 of 2025; Shri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner in WRIT-C No. 26614 of 2025; Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State respondents; Shri Vaibhav Tripathi for respondent - Union of India; Ms. Akanksha Gaur for the respondent - National Highway Authority of India (in short "NHAI"); and Shri H.R. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Pradeep Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the respondent no.6-Housing Society.

2. Since both writ petitions raise a common issue regarding disbursement of compensation for Plot Nos. 139-A and 143 (part of Gata Nos. 984, 986, and 1003) situated in Village Bagdaudhi Kachhar, Tehsil and District Kanpur Nagar, acquired for the NH-91 Road Widening Project, with consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same have been heard together and are being decided by this common order. 2 WRIC No. 26143 of 2025

3. Shri H.R. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Pradeep Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the respondent no.6-Housing Society files affidavits in both the writ petitions, which are taken on record. Shri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner in WRIT-C No. 26614 of 2025 also files an affidavit in the said writ petition, which is also taken on record.

4. Both the aforesaid writ petitions have been preferred for a direction to respondents to forthwith release and disburse lawful compensation to the petitioners for Plot No.139-A and Plot No.143 (originally part of Gata Nos.984, 986, 1003) situated in Village Bagdaudhi Kachhar, Tehsil and District Kanpur Nagar acquired under Road Widening Project of NH-91 and for a further direction to respondents to decide the representations of the petitioners made in this regard within a stipulated period.

5. At the admission stage, while entertaining WRIT-C No. 26143 of 2025, the Division Bench has passed the following order: "1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Ajit Singh, learned Standing Counsel for State respondents; Shri Vaibhav Tripathi for respondent no.1 and Ms. Akanksha Gaur for National Highway Authority of India (in short "NHAI").

2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for a direction to respondents to forthwith release and disburse lawful compensation to the petitioner for Plot No.143 (originally part of Gata Nos.984, 986, 1003) situated in Village Bagdaudhi Kachhar, Tehsil and District Kanpur Nagar acquired under Road Widening Project of NH-91 and for a further direction to respondents to decide the representations of the petitioner made in this regard within stipulated period.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was member of Ramganga Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti Limited having its office at Naramau, G.T. Road, Kanpur Nagar, which is registered under the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965. The society had executed a lease deed in favour of the petitioner for Plot No.143 measuring approximately 229.9 sq. mtrs. (approximately 275 sq. yards) on

24.03.2006. The layout plan of the land was duly approved by Kanpur Development Authority (in short "KDA") vide letter dated 07.06.1988 pursuant to issuance of No-Objection Certificate (NOC) by KDA dated 20.03.1979. The land was specifically demarcated as Plot No.143 for residential use as part of the Society's Development Scheme. The petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.2,10,250/- towards lease premium, in addition to development charges and boundary wall charges. He has also paid stamp duty of Rs.13,800/- in accordance with prevailing circle rate fixed by the District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar. Admittedly the land was 3 WRIC No. 26143 of 2025 acquired by NHAI.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once it is not in dispute that the lease deed was executed by the Cooperative Society in favour of the petitioner and actual consideration had also been passed on to the Cooperative Society way back, then at this stage, once land has been acquired by NHAI for road widening project, the compensation is to be released in favour of the petitioner, as there is no other impediment in this regard.

5. Confronted with this, learned counsel for NHAI prays for adjournment for seeking appropriate instructions. Similar request has also been made by learned Standing Counsel. On their request, put up this matter as fresh on 27.08.2025."

6. Shri H.R. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent no.6 submits that the respondent No.6 - Ramganga Sahakari Grih Nirman Samiti Limited is a primary housing cooperative society duly registered under the provisions of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965. Its registration number is 179, dated 17.04.1979. The principal object of the society is to acquire land, obtain the required layout plan approval, and distribute residential plots of various sizes, i.e. 200, 250, 300, and 400 square yards, to its members for the construction of residential houses. The society has 297 individual members, forming its General Body.

7. Shri H.R. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent no.6 further submits that to achieve its purpose, the society initially submitted an application on 10.03.1979 to the Executive Engineer (Planning), Kanpur Development Authority (KDA), seeking a No-Objection Certificate for purchasing specific land parcels, Plot Nos. 599, 600, 601, 602, 603, and 604, situated in village Bagdaudhi Kachhar. The KDA communicated through a letter dated 20.03.1979, stating that while the village lay outside the Kanpur Nagar Mahapalika limits, it was within the jurisdiction of KDA. However, as no master plan had yet been prepared for that area, the Authority had no objection to the society purchasing the said land. Following this, the society purchased several plots of land in village Bagdaudhi Kachhar and Pargahi Kachhar, Kanpur, through registered sale deeds executed between 1979 and 1981 by various sellers. The society prepared and submitted a layout plan, which was subsequently approved by the KDA. Residential plots of various sizes were allotted to its members as per the approved layout plan.

8. He further argues that later, the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) initiated acquisition proceedings under the National Highways Act, 1956 (in short 'the Act, 1956'), which affected the society's land. A notification under Section 3A(1) was issued on 09.02.2018, published in Times of India and Dainik Jagran on 04.08.2018, covering the village Bagdaudhi Kachhar. The declaration under Section 3D followed 4 WRIC No. 26143 of 2025 on 21.12.2018. The Additional District Magistrate (Land Acquisition), Kanpur Nagar then made an award dated 27.08.2020, determining compensation for several plots owned by the society, including plots in question of the petitioners, i.e. Plot Nos. 984, 986, and 1003.

9. Shri H.R. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel submits that admittedly, most of the land of the respondent No.6 - the Society had been utilized by the NHAI for laying a four lane road, and adequate compensation had not been accorded. He submits that even though the respondent No.6 has not instituted any separate proceedings, the respondent No.6 - the Society is inclined to institute separate proceedings regarding its grievance as it is claimed that the compensation had been deposited but on the spot, the excess land of the respondent No.6 had been utilized by the NHAI. He further submits that as the respondent No.6 is a necessary party and even if in response to the order passed by this court, it had been impleaded as a party, the respondent No.6 - the Society has a separate cause of action and is inclined to press the relief in separate proceedings and leave may be accorded to it to agitate before the competent authority regarding its grievance.

10. Learned counsels for the petitioners, in this backdrop state that as the respondent No.6 has also turned up in the instant proceedings and the petitioners are members of the respondent No.6 - the Society, and admittedly, the land in question had been acquired for laying a four lane road, adequate compensation is to be ensured to the petitioners as they are aggrieved with the disbursement of compensation.

11. Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State respondents submits that as disputed facts have been pressed before this court and the respondent No.6 has, till date, not agitated, and rights of the respondent No.6 have not been crystallized yet, in absence thereof, rights of the individual members of the respondent No.6 cannot be crystallized as they cannot claim better right than that of the respondent No.6. He submits that it cannot be said that they are the members of the society and they are also entitled to compensation, and in case law permits, the grievance of the society would be addressed in accordance with law. He further submits that the State Government had issued a detailed Government Order dated

12.05.2016, which provides that in case the claimant files a 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 the claim of the petitioners as well as the respondent No.6 - the Society would be redressed by the District Level Committee.

12. Similar objection has also been taken by Ms. Akanksha Gaur, learned counsel for the NHAI. She submits on the basis of instructions that admittedly the acquisition took place, whatever amount has been quantified by the SLAO, the same is already deposited and at this stage, she is not in a position to acknowledge the claim set up by the petitioners. However, as adequate compensation has already been deposited to the 5 WRIC No. 26143 of 2025 SLAO, the said aspect can very well be verified by the SLAO and she has no objection, in case the matter is relegated to the District Level Committee in view of the Government Order dated 12.05.2016.

13. Considering the factual situation, at first hand, we are not inclined to adjudicate the matter on merits at this stage. However, since the Society has now appeared in these proceedings, the claims raised by the petitioners vis-à-vis the Society and the NHAI can appropriately be examined by the District Level Committee. As both the writ petitions have been filed by individual members and the respondent No.6 – the Society has not instituted any independent proceedings for its own claim, we refrain from making any observation on the rights of the respondent No.6 – the Society in the absence of any determination by a competent forum or court. Undoubtedly, the rights of the petitioners, being members of the Society, would flow from and depend upon the rights recognized in law of the respondent No.6 – the Society itself.

14. In the interest of justice, we consider it appropriate that the parties shall submit their respective claims before the District Level Committee within three weeks from today. The District Level Committee shall consider and decide the claims of the respondent No.6 – the Society as well as its individual members, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all concerned, including the revenue authorities, the Kanpur Development Authority, and the members of the Society. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.

15. With the aforesaid observations and directions, both the aforementioned writ petitions stand disposed of. October 13, 2025 NLY (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad