HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 35154 of 2025 Court No. - 39 HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J. HON'BLE SATYA VEER SINGH, J. 1. Mr. Sudeep Harkauli, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioners and submits, impugned order dated 4th September, 2025 passed by the prescribed authority purporting to exercise supervisory power under section 34 of U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916. He submits, his clients made constructions on land belonging to the Nagar Palika. They have been residing therein for several years and paying rent. There stood resolution made by the Municipality for allowing persons in occupation of property belonging to it, to be conveyed to them at fair market value. Instead, purporting to exercise such power, impugned order was made. He seeks interference, on submission that his clients are prepared to pay fair market value. 2. Mr. Raj Mohan Upadhyay, learned advocate, Additional Chief Standing Counsel appears on behalf of State. Mr. Harsh Vardhan Gupta, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondent nos.4 and 5 (the Nagar Palika). 3. On query, Mr. Harkauli refers us to order dated 14th July, 2025 passed by co-ordinate Bench disposing of, inter alia, Writ-C no.20905 of 2025 (Sabbey Alam Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others). Paragraph 10 from said order is reproduced below. "10. So far as the resolution passed by the Board dated 25.11.2024 is concerned, we find that the rules clearly prohibit the Board from transferring or leasing out the property in question except by auction or after inviting tenders. Any departure with such procedure can be by recording reasons and the method for fixing the rent has also to be specified. The resolution dated 25.11.2024 does not meet this Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sudeep Harkauli Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Harsh Vardhan Gupta Nasir Ahmad And 10 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) requirement. We are, therefore, not inclined to issue any direction to the respondents to act upon the resolution dated 25.11.2024." (emphasis supplied) 4. The Nagar Palika has in its possession said order dated 14th July, 2025 (supra). It has become final, as we have ascertained there has been no movement to challenge it in the Supreme Court. Clearly said in the order is, inter alia, resolution dated 25th November, 2024 does not meet the requirement. It makes the resolution bad. It could not be pronounced so in the writ petition since, petitioners therein had sought compliance with the resolution. 5. Nothing prevails the Nagar Palika from passing fresh resolution, recalling or cancelling resolution dated 25th November, 2024 and thereupon to proceed in accordance with the rules in respect of the plots occupied by petitioners. Impugned notices dated 23th June, 2025 were issued pursuant to action taken by the Nagar Palika in exercise of power under section 34, ostensibly to prevent execution of the resolution, are to be set aside and quashed because it cannot be said that execution of the resolution would be of such nature as to cause or tend to cause, inter alia, obstruction, annoyance or injury to the public. Accordingly, the notices are set aside and quashed. 6. With above observations and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. October 14, 2025 Kpy WRIC No. 35154 of 2025 2 (Arindam Sinha,J.) (Satya Veer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- KAVLESHWAR PRASAD YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad