HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11636 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Shri Madhukar Raman Yadav and Shri Ishan Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has fairly submitted that the issue in relation to this writ petition has already been decided by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Reena Sharma and 42 others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others, Neutral Citation No.-2025:AHC- LKO:76603-DB, wherein the Court has upheld the notifications that are impugned in the present writ petition. However, the Court has also granted liberty as provided in paragraph Nos.38 and 39 of the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench. The same is delineated herein-below:- "38. Finally, learned counsel for the petitioners contention that since most of the petitioners have constructed residential houses, and the scheme launched by the Lucknow Development Authority is also for the purpose of construction of residential houses for the planned development of the city, the plots of the petitioners may be adjusted in the scheme after charging the prescribed development fees. 39. This Court is of the considered view that it is for the Lucknow Development Authority to consider the request of the petitioners. The petitioners are always at liberty to make a representation to the Lucknow Development Authority for adjustment of their plots under the scheme. If such a representation is made, it is Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Madhukar Raman Yadav, Ishan Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ratnesh Chandra Santosh Kumari Kashyap .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing And Urban Planning Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) always open to the Lucknow Development Authority to consider and take an appropriate decision thereon in accordance with law and the applicable Government Orders on the subject matter." 3. In light of the above, we are of the view that same directions in the paragraph Nos.38 and 39 would apply to the petitioner and the petitioner shall be at liberty to move an application in accordance with law laid down in the above co-ordinate Bench judgement. 4. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. December 11, 2025 Ashutosh WRIC No. 11636 of 2025 2 (Manjive Shukla,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench