Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 148159 (ALL)

SALMAN AHMAD v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOUSING AND URBAN PLANNING LKO AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/6126/2025 · 2025-06-27

Alok Mathur, Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36650-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6126 of 2025 Petitioner :- Salman Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Housing And Urban Planning Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Nafees,Pawan Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ratnesh Chandra Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J. 1. The case has been taken up in the revised list. 2. Despite notice, no one has appeared on behalf of the Lucknow Development Authority. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of Shop No.2, Zone-4, Puraniya Tiraha, near Sri Plaza, Sitapur Road Yojna, Police Station-Madiyav, Lucknow, which is situated in House No.643/050 (Purana Nagar Nigam No.537/182Kha/1 since 1992-1993. It has been submitted that the petitioner wanted to refurnish/reconstruct his shop and consequently has moved an application before the Lucknow Development Authority for sanction of the map. It is only the application was made by the petitioner for sanction of the map but the respondents had issued a notice u/s 21(i) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning And Development Act, 1973 (in short 'the Act, 1973'). The order has been given to him on 29.05.2025. 4. Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, submitted that the petitioner has an efficacious remedy of filing an appeal u/s 27(ii) of the Act, 1973 where the petitioner can raise all the defence, even otherwise, prima facie it is not the case that the petitioner is having sanctioned map is with regard to the existing shop and consequently this court is not inclined to interfere in the present proceeding, at this stage. 5. With the aforesaid circumstances, present petition is disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal u/s 128 (ii) of the Act, 1973. 6. It is further provided that if the appeal is filed within next one week then the respondents shall not proceed for demolition as per the impugned order dated 29.05.2025, during the pendency of the appeal. 7. We further direct the appellate authority to decide the appeal expeditiously within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of the appeal. 8. It is further made clear that in case the petitioner does not file the appeal within the time prescribed by this court, the benefit of this order shall not be available to him. Order Date :- 27.6.2025 *S.Chaurasia* (Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J.) (Alok Mathur, J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM CHAURASIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench