HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 10495 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J. 1. Heard Shri Santosh Kumar Upadhyay along with Ms. Anita Singh and Shri Nagendra Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and Shri Ashok Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the private opposite parties. 2. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has sought following reliefs:- "I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of "Certiorari" quashing the impugned show cause notice dated 17.04.2023 (Annxure No. 5) and the consequential demand order dated 12.10.2023 (Annexure No.7) and Recovery Certificate (RC) dated 28.12.2023 (Annexure No. 1) for Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rs.7,50,000- for Gata/ Khasra No. 312+ Rs.7,50,000/- for Gata/Khasra No. 855) issued against the petitioner. II. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents not to take any coercive action against the Petitioner in furtherance of the said recovery proceedings." 3. We confronted the learned counsel for the petitioner as to what is the explanation for the delay in approaching the Court even if we ignore the fact that the orders were appealable and assume that a writ petition would Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Santosh Kumar Upadhyay, Anita Singh, Nagendra Bahadur Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ashok Kumar Verma M/S Svgs Enterprises Thru. Auth. Sig./Poa Mr Ritesh Kumar Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue And Others .....Respondent(s) lie, learned counsel for the petitioner could not satisfy us on the point of delay. 4. We have perused the pleadings in the writ petition. Casual pleadings have been made in Para 17 that due the prolonged illness of authorized signatory of M/s SVGS Enterprises petitioner Mr. Ritesh Singh no action could be taken to request for withdrawal and setting aside of the illegally issued Recovery Certificate. It is hardly an explanation to be accepted. The petitioner is a Company and therefore, somebody else could have been authorized to file the writ petition. Apart from the aforesaid pleadings in Para 17 there is nothing in the writ petition which may contain any explanation for the delay, which is inordinate, as, the impugned notices and orders were passed in 2023. In fact, the Recovery Certificate dated 28.12.2023 is only a consequential action. The main order is dated 12.10.2023 which was neither appealed nor challenged before the writ Court earlier. We are not satisfied with the explanation offered for the delay. 5. Accordingly, we dismiss the writ petition only on the ground of delay and laches. October 30, 2025 R.K.P. WRIC No. 10495 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Bharti,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench