Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:54-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10847 of 2024 Petitioner :- Priya Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Housing And Urban Planning And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Kumar Mishra,Bhalendu Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ratnesh Chandra Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J. 1. None appears for the petitioner though it is a backlog fresh case. However, Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad is present. 2. At page no.52 of paper-book, an order dated 26.11.2024 passed in Writ-C No.10119 of 2024 [Rajeeva Nayan Shukla & Ors. vs. State of U.P. & Ors.] has been annexed and the same reads as under:- "1. Heard. 2. The petitioners claim to have purchased the land in question from a developer and claim to have built houses thereon. The developers themselves had purchased the land from the tenure-holders in 2020 and the petitioners purchased it from the developers in 2022 and 2023, however, in August 2024, a public notice was issued by the Competent Authority of Uttar Pradesh Avas EvamVikash Parishad that the land mentioned in the notice had been acquired. Though the notice is undated and does not mention as to when the acquisition took place, according to the petitioner acquisition proceedings took place in 2004 and notification/publicationunder Section 31 (2) of the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikash Parishad Act, 1965 (in short 'the Act, 1965) was published on 29.9.2006 but the revenue record did not contain the name of Avas Evam Vikash Parishad, therefore, the petitioners purchased the land bonafide and have constructed their houses thereon. 3. In the above circumstances, the petitioners have moved applications under Section 49 of the Act, 1965 for release or settlement of the land with the petitioner on the payment basis as the case may be, however, learned counsel for the Avas Evam Vikash Parishad says that the application is not referable to the condition mentioned in the Section 49 of the Act, 1965, it is, therefore, not maintainable. 4. We have perused the provisions of Section 49 of the Act, 1965 which speaks of modification of the scheme of the Avas Evam Vikash Parishad by the State Government. Be that as it may,let the applications be considered and decided by the State Government say within two months. 5. The State Government shall also consider the interim relief application of the petitioner, if it is otherwise permissible in law, till it takes a final decision considering the claim of the petitioners, as their houses are existing thereon, which may be in jeopardy, which shall be done within 10 days of the filing of such application. 6.The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations/directions. 7. Copy of this order be provided to the learned counsel for the petitioners within 24 hours. " 3. In this case, as pointed out by Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for the contesting opposite parties no such application referable to Section 49 of the Act, 1965 has been filed by the petitioner. 4. In view of the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move such an application if it is otherwise maintainable and in the event, such an application is moved within one month, it shall be considered accordingly in terms of the order dated 26.11.2024 quoted above. (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Order Date :- 2.1.2025 Shanu/- Digitally signed by :- SHANU SUMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench