The Allahabad High Court has directed the Ghaziabad Development Authority (GDA) to acquire land for its Harnandipuram township project exclusively through negotiations with landowners. This ruling applies to the authority’s plans to assemble land for the 521- to 541-hectare development, situated near the Delhi-Meerut Road and the Regional Rapid Transit System (RRTS) corridor. Previously, the GDA had proposed using Section 11 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 to restrict land sales in eight villages, while still permitting farmers to trade parcels among themselves.
Land acquisition stalled before court intervention
The GDA approved the Harnandipuram housing scheme in August 2024, focusing on eight villages: Mathurapur, Nagla Firoz Mohanpur, Shamsher, Champat Nagar, Bhanera Khurd, Shahpur Nijmorta, Bhovapur, and Morta. By early 2025, around 25 farmers had sold land totaling over ₹5 crore, receiving compensation four times the market rate along with plot shares. This marked the authority’s largest direct acquisition since the Madhuban Bapudham township project.
By September 2025, the GDA reported acquiring only 14 hectares since March. It then planned to invoke the Land Acquisition Act for the remaining 507 hectares, enabling forced transfers through legal notices. However, by December 2025, Vice-Chairman Nandkishore Kalaal stated that all remaining land would be purchased voluntarily. The GDA had already signed deeds for 35 hectares, secured approval to buy another 85 hectares, and was negotiating at a rate of 2 to 3 hectares per day, aiming to launch the first phase within five months.
The ₹400 crore project falls under the state’s CM Urban Expansion New City Promotion Scheme and will feature a Sports City, Medi City, Cyber City, and Edu City, with direct connections to the Delhi Metro and RRTS. It is intended as an affordable housing option for Delhi-NCR’s middle class.
Court blocks forced land transfers
The high court’s decision now requires the GDA to abandon plans for compulsory acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act. While the authority had previously relied on mutual agreements, the court’s intervention mandates negotiations as the sole method for securing the remaining land. It is unclear whether this directive applies uniformly across all eight targeted villages.
