HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11011 of 2025 Court No. - 17 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Ms. Sameeksha Chadha and Shri Piyush Mani Tripathi, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Rahul Shukla, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and Shri Aviral Singh, Advocate holding brief of Shri Shobhit Mohan Shukla, the learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.2 and 3-U.P. Real Estate Regulatory Authority. 2. Learned counsel for the opposite parties have raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has got a statutory remedy of filing an appeal under Section 58 of the Real Estate Regulation and Development Act, 2016 which appeal would lie before this Court only. They have submitted that as the petitioner has got a statutory remedy of filing an appeal, the instant writ petition would not be maintainable. 3. Confronted with the aforesaid objection, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that she does not want to press the instant petition and she seeks liberty to file an appeal under the appropriate provision. 4. The writ petition is dismissed as not pressed with the aforesaid liberty. November 14, 2025 -Amit K- Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Piyush Mani Tripathi, Sameeksha Chadha Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Shobhit Mohan Shukla (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Mahaluxmi Built Tech Limited Thru. Authorised Signatory .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Housing And Urban Planning Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench