HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 36232 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Shri Chandan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Fuzail Ahmad Ansari, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent nos.1 and 2 and Shri Ravi Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for Varanasi Development Authority, Varanasi (respondent no.3). 2. Notice need not be issued to the private respondent nos.4 & 5, in view of the order proposed to be passed 3. The instant writ petition is preferred with request to issue direction to the respondent no.3 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 4.7.2024 within some stipulated time. 4. Shri Fuzail Ahmad Ansari, learned Standing Counsel has raised an objection that the petitioner had moved an application before the Varanasi Development Authority (VDA), Varanasi on 19.3.2021, alleging that the private respondent nos.4 and 5 have usurped the property in question and constructed a six-storied shopping complex. On receipt of the said application, the VDA had issued notices to the respondent nos.4 and 5 on 04.04.2021, 4.7.2021 and 28.12.2021 and thereafter passed an order on 05.09.2022. The said order was challenged by the respondent no.4 before the Commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi in Appeal under Section 27 (2) of U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (in short, Act, 1976). Finally, the respondent no.3 vide order dated 06.04.2024 has decided the appeal and after setting aside the notice dated 28.12.2021, the matter was remitted back to the VDA to re-examine the matter. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Chandan Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ravi Prakash Pandey Rajendra Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. We find that the petitioner is complainant and his complaint had been entertained. The proceedings under the Act, 1976 had been initiated by the VDA, which is subject matter of challenge in revision before the State Government by the aggrieved party, who is also having valuable rights to contest the matter. 6. In the facts and circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. October 17, 2025 RKP WRIC No. 36232 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad