Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41144-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6451 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dukhi And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Lko. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raj Karan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. As regards the petitioners before us are concerned, there was an order under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the Code, 2006) for removing the encroachment, which was challenged in appeal and the same has been rejected, as accepted by the petitioners' counsel but the order is not on record. The only contention raised is that short notice was given for demolition. When proceedings have been drawn under Section 67 of the Code, 2006 and an appeal was filed by the petitioner, which has been rejected, then in compliance of the said order, the demolition has taken place therefore, the aforesaid plea is not available purely in the facts of this case as the petitioners all along had knowledge not only of the order passed under Section 67 of the Code, 2006 but also rejection of their appeal. As regards the plea that pick and choose has been done by the opposite parties in the sense that only the petitioners' houses have been demolished whereas there were more than twenty other persons, who had illegally constructed their houses, who were party in the appeal also but their houses have not been demolished. On being asked to show an order of demolition against the said persons, the counsel could not show it. He however submitted that they were parties in the appeal. Neither the appellate order is before us nor the order under Section 67 of the Code, 2006. If the petitioners have a cause to seek demolition of the illegal houses or encroachments done by other persons, he can maintain a writ petition separately but we cannot consider relief no. 4 in this writ petition in the absence of requisite material before us. As regards relief no. 2, the policy alleged to be in existence has not been annexed. However, if there is any such policy, the petitioners can approach the concerned authority and if nothing is done, they can seek appropriate remedies. Subject to the aforesaid liberty, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter. Writ petition stands disposed of. [Manish Kumar, J.] [Rajan Roy,J] Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Nitesh Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench