MANISH KUMAR PATEL Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) This petition has been filed by the petitioner, who claims to be the resident of village Wari at district Prayagraj, challenging a notification issued by the State Government dtd. 25/9/2023, under Sec. 2(d) of the U.P. Industrial Development Act, 1976, whereby various villages including village Wari has been included within the territorial limits of the U.P. Expressways Industrial Development Authority (UPEIDA). The notification is primarily challenged on the ground that the petitioner, who is agriculturist of the village would now be prevented from undertaking any agricultural activity on his own land. It is also submitted that on account of the notification under challenge the petitioner would be prevented from raising construction of his house etc. It is also submitted that the petitioner's right to live would also be affected.

(3.) Petition is opposed by the learned State counsel as also Sri J.B. Singh, learned counsel for the second respondent, on the ground that the notification issued by the State is perfectly just and valid and requires no interference.