HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 33710 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Shri Nitin Kumar Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioners; Shri Devesh Vikram, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for State respondent and Shri Abhimanyu Singh, learned counsel for Mathura Vrindavan Development Authority (in short "Authority"). 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for quashing the impugned notice dated 12.08.2025 issued by respondent no.3 as well as the entire proceeding against the petitioner under Section 27 (1) of the U.P. Urban Planning & Development Act, 1973 (in short "Act, 1973") and for a direction to respondents not to demolish the shop of the petitioner situated over Khasra No.1283, Surakh Bangar, Tehsil and District Mathura. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended that though in the instant matter notice had been affixed over the shop in question showing the name of second petitioner, who is not even the owner of the shop. The actual owner is first petitioner-Kali Charan Singh. Said factual aspect had been adequately informed to the Authority but without giving notice to the actual owner, the impugned proceeding has been finalised. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that similar controversy has earlier been raised in Writ-C No.35048 of 2025 (Om Prakash Gautam v. State of U.P. & Ors.), which was allowed on 7.10.2025 and as such it is submitted that being on similar footing, the instant writ petition may also be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Nitin Kumar Agrawal Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Dharmendra Singh Chauhan Kali Charan Singh And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. So far as factual and legal aspect is concerned, the same could not be disputed by learned counsel for the respondents. 6. Considering the factual situation, as admittedly no notice is served upon the owner, in the interest of justice, it is provided that the order dated 12.08.2025 may be treated as notice and in case the first petitioner files objection to the said notice within fifteen days from today before the competent authority, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law and in view of the observations made by this Court in Om Prakash Gautam (Supra) in three weeks, thereafter but certainly after giving opportunity to the petitioner. 7. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. October 13, 2025 SP/ WRIC No. 33710 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURYA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad