HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 8076 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State Respondents No. 1, 2, 6 & 7 and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for the respondents no. 3 to 5. 2. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:- "a) To issue writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the notification No. 631/L.A.C./H.Q. dated 06-09-2023 issued under section 32(1) of the Utter Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 published in the U.P. Gazette on 16th September 2023 (contained as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition) to the extent its affects the petitioners, in the interest of justice; and b) To issue writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the award dated 23- 12.2024 (contained as Annexure No.2 to the writ petition) passed under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 being case no. 08/2023-24 being illegal and arbitrary and against the prescribed procedure provided under the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 read with Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, in the interest of justice to the extent its affects the petitioner; and c) To issue with the nature of Certiorari to quash the order No. 308/V.Bhu.A.A./Amaldramat/2025 of the Collector, Ayodhya dated 01-07- Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dwijendra Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ratnesh Chandra Sarjoo Prasad Yadav And 5 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing And Urban Planning Lko. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) 2025 (contained as Annexure No.3 to the writ petition) through which the Collector Ayodhya mutated the name of U.P. Avas Evem Vikas Parishad in place of the petitioners' plot nos. 1001 min., 1008 min., 1009 min., 1010 min., 1011 min. and 1012 min. situated at village Manjha Barehata Tahsil- Sadar, District- Ayodhya; to the extent its affects the petitioners in the interest of justice; and d) To issue writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the illegal order of Prescribed Authority dated 29-07-2025 for removal of construction of site of Hotel Sagar Palace, (contained as Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition) in the interest of justice; and e) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to interfere into the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the plot no. 1001, 1008, 1009, 1010, 1011, 1012 situated at village Manjha Barehata, Tahsil - Sadar, District- Ayodhya, in the interest of justice" 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that similar issue regrading acquisition proceedings for Avas Evem Vikas Parishad have been challenged before this Court in PIL No. 637 of 2025, 'Saryu Nagar Vikas Samiti Vs. State of U.P. and Others', and in Writ-C No. 7231 of 2025, 'Rajeev Narayan Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and Others'. However, it has also been submitted that annexure no.4 is an order of demolition that have been passed in the case of the petitioners individually and the petitioners seek to challenge such order as it has been passed without opportunity of hearing be granted to the petitioners. 4. Insofar as land acquisition proceedings annexures no. 1, 2, & 3 are concerned, writ petitions are already pending before this Court. With regard to annexure no. 4 which is an order dated 29.07.2025 passed by the Competent Authority on the representation of the petitioners dated 03.07.2025, directing him to remove illegal construction on his own or the same shall be demolished by the Parishad in accordance with the Rules, we have gone through the order dated 29.07.2025 in which reference has been made of Writ WRIC No. 8076 of 2025 2 Petition No. 5258 of 2025 being filed by the petitioners saying that notice had been issued against the dead person Late Ram Sagar, the said writ petition was disposed of setting aside the impugned order dated 25.04.2025 with liberty to the respondents to proceed afresh. 5. It has been submitted that in pursuance of the order passed by this Court on 29.05.2025 notice was issued to the petitioners on 25.06.2025 asking the petitioners to appear and place their case. The petitioners in reply have submitted their letter dated 03.07.2025. The letter dated 03.07.2025 has referred to meeting of the Steering Committee of Investors Committee dated 29.05..2025 held in the chamber of the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh wherein certain decisions were taken. The Competent Officer has referred to Section 28 notification issued on 23.04.2022 and stated that no application has been made by the petitioner to Avas Evam Vikas Parishad seeking permission to raise construction. Such permission was required after Section 28 notification had been issued. Hence the construction that has been carried out by the petitioners has been declared to be illegal. 6. Sri Ratnesh Chandra, Advocate appearing for the respondents no. 3 to 5 has submitted before this Court that after Section 28 Notification issued on 23.04.2022 the persons intending to raise construction in land proposed to be acquired had to submitted an application seeking permission under Section 35(1) of the Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965, such permission was not sought from the Housing Commissioner. In case such permission would have been sought and refused then the applicant would have remedy of filing an appeal to the Court. Against an order issued under Section 32 notifying the land, as is the case herein, the petitioner has remedy of filing an appeal before the State Government under Section 32(3) of the Act. 7. The petitioner has not preferred appeal as provided under the Act to the State Government till date against the order dated 29.07.2025.It has also been submitted by learned counsel WRIC No. 8076 of 2025 3 appearing for the Avas Evam Vikas Parishad that as is evident from the decision taken in the meeting dated 29.05.2025, the Chairperson and the Housing Commissioner had only observed that the investors may proceed with construction activities subject to compliance with all applicable Rules, Regulations and due process, in the case of the petitioners and several other hotels, which were proposed to be constructed or were under construction, the owners/investors had to apply to the Housing Commissioner for permission/approval of their map under Section 35(1) of the Act, the petitioners did not apply under the applicable Rules and Regulations. They did not follow the due process. 8. We have found from the pleadings on record that although the petitioners submitted objections under Section 30 to the appropriate authority, they did not apply for any permission to construct under Section 35(1) of the Act. 9. Since the petitioners are aggrieved against the Acquisition Notification and there is statutory remedy under Section 32(3) of the Act, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the State Government within a week from today alongwith an application for interim relief. In case the petitioners filed their appeal alongwith an application for interim relief, the same shall be considered by the State Government and appropriate orders shall be passed on such application within a further period of two weeks. August 25, 2025 Darpan Sharma WRIC No. 8076 of 2025 4 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- DARPAN SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench