HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 35657 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Shri A.P. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondent no.1 and Shri Vineet Pandey, learned counsel for U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad (respondent nos.2, 3 and 4). 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, notice need not be issued to the private respondent nos.5 and 6. 3. The instant writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of Constitution of India assailing the validity of the impugned order dated 29.11.2024, whereby the U.P. Avas Evam Vikash Parishad has asked the petitioner to submit certain documents and also directed sealing of house No.MIG 580, Sector-5, Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, Sikandara Yojna, Agra. Further request is made to issue direction to the respondents not to give effect to the impugned order dated 29.11.2024. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the house in question was allotted in the name of Santan Singh vide allotment letter dated 19.08.1991 and the physical possession was given to him. After his death, his only daughter Soni inherited the property and her name was mutated as allottee/owner. Later on, Soni Devi had executed a registered Will deed dated 07.01.1994 in favour of Smt. Rekha Rani, wife of Bhojendra Sharma and after the death of Soni Devi, the name of Rekha Rani was mutated on the basis of said registered Will deed. Smt. Rekha Rani had also died on Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anand Prakash Srivastava, Balbeer Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Vineet Pandey Lokendra Sharma .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) 13.02.2024, leaving behind her husband Bhojendra Sharma and two sons namely Lokendra Sharma and Yogendra Sharma. Later on, the petitioner moved an application for mutation of the property in question on the basis of registered Will deed, which is being objected by the private respondents. He submits that even there was some outstanding amount in lieu of the allotment of the house in question and the same was deposited by the petitioner. He had also deposited the amount in lieu of recovery certificate. As such, it is claimed that on the basis of aforesaid registered Will deed, the name of the petitioner may be mutated over the property in question. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on the communication dated 19.02.2025, which is appended at page 54 of the paper book. 5. Considering the factual situation, we are not inclined to adjudicate the instant matter. 6. However, in the interest of justice, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with observation that in case the petitioner files a detailed objection to the impugned notice within a week's time from today, we expect that the same shall be considered and decided by the Assistant Housing Commissioner, U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, Agra (respondent no.3) in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him but certainly after giving ample opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders in the matter. October 13, 2025 RKP WRIC No. 35657 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad