Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J.—In this group of writ petitions, the petitioners have filed the present writ petitions praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to allot 10% developed abadi land in terms of the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Gajraj and others v. State of U.P. and others, 2011(11) ADJ 1.

2. For facility, the facts of Writ Petition No. 7521 of 2016 is being taken into consideration.

3. It transpires that a notification dated 4th July, 2003 under Section 4 and notification dated 21st July, 2003 under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued for acquisition of various parcels of land for planned industrial development. The urgency clause was invoked and possession was taken, award was made and compensation was paid to the petitioners’. The petitioners’ land was situate in Village Chhaparauli Bangar, Pargana Dadari, Tehsil Sadar, District Gautam Budh Nagar. The petitioner did not challenge the acquisition proceedings and received the compensation. However, other land owners challenged the acquisition proceedings. The aforesaid notification as well as other notifications for different tracts of land and for different villages were clubbed together and decided by the Full Bench of this Court in Gajraj’s case (supra) vide judgment dated 21st October, 2011. The Full Bench disposed of the writ petitions with the following directions :

“481. As noticed above, the land has been acquired of large number of villagers in different villages of Greater Noida and Noida. Some of the petitioners had earlier come to this Court and their writ petitions have been dismissed as noticed above upholding the notifications which judgments have become final between them. Some of the petitioners may not have come to the Court and have left themselves in the hand of the Authority and State under belief that the State and Authority shall do the best for them as per law. We cannot lose sight of the fact that the above farmers and agricultures/owners whose land has been acquired are equally affected by taking of their land. As far as consequence and effect of the acquisition it equally affects on all land losers. Thus land owners whose writ petitions have earlier been dismissed upholding the notifications may have grievances that the additional compensation which was a subsequent event granted by the Authority may also be extended to them and for the aforesaid, further spate of litigation may start in so far as payment of additional compensation is concerned. In the circumstances, we leave it to the Authority to take a decision as to whether the benefit of additional compensation shall also be extended to those with regard to whom the notifications of acquisition have been upheld or those who have not filed any writ petitions. We leave this in the discretion of the Authority/State which may be exercised keeping in view the principles enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

482. In view of the foregoing conclusions we order as follows:

1. The Writ Petition No. 45933 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 47545 of 2011 relating to village Nithari, Writ Petition No. 47522 of 2011 relating to village Sadarpur, Writ Petition No. 45196 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45208 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45211 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45213 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45216 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45223 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45224 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45226 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45229 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45230 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45235 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45238 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45283 of 2011 relating to village Khoda, Writ Petition No. 46764 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 46785 of 2011 relating to village Sultanpur, Writ Petition No. 46407 of 2011 relating to village Chaura Sadatpur and Writ Petition No. 46470 of 2011 relating to village Alaverdipur which have been filed with inordinate delay and laches are dismissed.

2(i) The writ petitions of Group 40 (Village Devla)