Land Acquisition - Claim for 10% developed abadi land denied : Judgment of Gajraj not of universal application

Allahabad High Court Denies Petitioners' Claim for 10% Developed Abadi Land. Court Upholds Limited Relief to Gajraj Case Petitioners, Citing No Precedent for Future Cases

In a significant judgment delivered on October 15, 2025, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the writ petitions filed by Dambar Singh and others seeking the allotment of 10% developed abadi land. The court upheld the decision of the Greater Noida Authority to restrict such allotment only to those petitioners who had originally challenged the land acquisition in the Gajraj case. This ruling reinforces the principle that benefits extended in unique circumstances do not set a precedent for future claims.

The petitioners, whose land was acquired by the state for planned development, had sought relief based on the Full Bench decision in the Gajraj case. However, the court clarified that the judgment in Gajraj was specific to the peculiar facts of that case and not applicable as a precedent for others. The petitioners had not challenged the acquisition proceedings at the time, which was a crucial factor in the court's decision.

The judgment was delivered by a Division Bench comprising Justices Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Anish Kumar Gupta, who heard arguments from both sides. The petitioners contended that they should receive the same benefits as those granted in the Gajraj case, highlighting instances where similar benefits were allegedly extended to others. The court, however, held that Article 14 of the Constitution does not allow perpetuation of illegality or irregularity through negative equality.

The respondents, represented by Senior Counsel M.C. Chaturvedi, argued that due to limited land availability and financial constraints, the Authority had decided to grant additional compensation to all landowners but restrict the 10% abadi land benefit to those who had filed writ petitions in the Gajraj case. The court found this decision neither arbitrary nor discriminatory, emphasizing the discretion granted to the Authority by the Full Bench in Gajraj.

This ruling is consistent with previous Supreme Court decisions, including Savitri Devi and Khatoon cases, which affirmed the unique circumstances of Gajraj and directed that its reliefs should not be treated as precedents. The court reiterated that the petitioners had been compensated according to the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and had received additional compensation, negating their claims for further relief.

The judgment underscores the importance of challenging acquisition proceedings timely and upholds the principle that judicial decisions in specific contexts should not be generalized to other cases without due consideration of the factual and legal distinctions.

Bottom Line:

Land Acquisition - Petitioners not entitled to 10% developed abadi land as per Full Bench judgment in Gajraj's case. The judgment of Gajraj was confined to peculiar facts and circumstances and cannot be treated as a precedent for future cases.

Statutory provision(s):  

• - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Sections 4, 6, 17  
• - Article 14 of the Constitution of India

Dambar Singh v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2795291