Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 191647 (ALL)

SHIKHA MITTAL AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIC/35205/2025 · 2025-10-13

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 35205 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ravi Anand Agrawal, learned counsel for U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents. 2. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition for the following relief- "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities to remove the encroachment upon the commercial Plot No.12B/Com-2 area 393.75 square meter. ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent to execute the sale deed after taking the remaining amount of the total consideration of the plot in-question." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the commercial plot no.12B/Com-2 area 393.75 square meter was allotted to the petitioner by the U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad but on account of ongoing civil proceedings against U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad in Original Suit No.181 of 2008, the actual possession could not be handed over and as such, the petitioner could not deposit the remaining balance amount. However, it is categorically averred in the writ petition that the petitioners are willing to clear off the outstanding amount in lieu of the allotment letter. He also makes statement at bar that at present the suit, which was dismissed for want of prosecution in the year 2017, has not been restored and as such, it is claimed that there is no impediment not to deliver the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Brajesh Shukla, Krishna Dutt Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ravi Anand Agarwal Shikha Mittal And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) actual physical possession by the Awas Evam Vikas Parishad. 4. He has confined his relief that an application so moved before the Property Manager, U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, may be decided in accordance with law. He next submits that even though in the year 2012, respondent no.2 has already passed an order indicating therein that in case, there is no other legal impediment, the possession would be handed over to the petitioners. He submits that in spite of the said assurance, since the proceeding was dismissed for non-prosecution in the year 2017, as such there is no other impediment not to accord relief in accordance with law. 5. Sri Ravi Anand Agrawal, learned counsel for U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad submits that he may be accorded time to take correct status of ongoing proceeding as the matter was dismissed for non-prosecution in the year 2017. He further raises objection on the relief as has been prayed for as the petitioner has only averred that the petitioners are inclined to clear off the outstanding amount but it is nowhere averred qua the interest. He next submits that as admissible in terms of the allotment letter, the claim of the petitioners would be considered by the competent authority in case, an appropriate application is moved by the petitioners. 6. Considering the factual situation at this stage, we are not inclined to keep the matter pending consideration. With the consent of the parties, we dispose of this writ petition with an observation that in case, the petitioners move a detailed representation before the U.P. Housing Development Board, Lucknow within a period of two weeks, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously preferably within a period of three months in accordance with law, if there is no other legal impediment. As the petitioners are inclined to clear the outstanding dues, we expect that the Authority may take final decision but certainly, the proceedings which were pending before the competent court, the same may also be considered while passing the final order on the representation. October 14, 2025/Sumit S WRIC No. 35205 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad