Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 195776 (ALL)

MANOJ MISHRA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY./PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOUSING/URBAN PLANNING AND 4 OTHERS

WRIC/9693/2025 · 2025-10-07

Amitabh Kumar Rai, Sangeeta Chandra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9693 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Madhukar Ojha, Advocate on behalf of respondent nos.2 to 5 today in Court is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel, who appears on behalf of State-Respondent and Shri Madhukar Ojha, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 to 5. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 06.08.2025, issued by respondent no.4 in exercise of its power under Section 27(1) of Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 in Case No.666 of 2025 "Lucknow Development Authority vs. Shri Shivram Pandey & Others". It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner purchased agricultural land situated at Khasra No.557Ka, admeasuring around 0.100 hectare, Village Borumau, Police Station Sairpur, Tehsil Bakshi Ka Talab, District Lucknow from its recorded owner Smt. Sandhya katheria by way of registered sale deed executed on 24.06.2025. The petitioner, being the owner and occupier of such agricultural land, was shocked to learn that a demolition notice dated 07.08.2025 had been affixed to the boundary wall by the officers of the L.D.A. The petitioner was orally informed that the boundary wall which had been constructed, was illegal and would be demolished. Upon further investigation, the petitioner discovered that Case No.666 of 2025 had been instituted against Shivram Pandey who was not the seller of the land to the petitioner. In an attempt to obtain more details about Case No.666 of 2025, the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhinav Singh, Shashank Singh, Vivek Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ratnesh Chandra Manoj Mishra .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Housing/Urban Planning And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) petitioner learned that a show cause notice had been issued to Shivram Pandey and others on 19.07.2025 alleging illegal ploting on 42 Bighas of land situated at Village Borumau. The khasra number on which such illegal ploting was allegedly done is not mentioned in the impugned order. The petitioner, therefore, rushed to this Court only because the demolition notice had been fixed on the boundary wall. Learned counsel appearing for the L.D.A. on the basis of instructions has stated that one person by the name of Shivram Pandey along with others had carried out illegal ploting on 42 Bighas of land on Zone-4, which falls within the development area of the L.D.A. A notice was issued on 19.07.2025 to Shivram Pandey and others and the Case under Section 27 of of Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 was instituted thereafter. It has been submitted that upon actual physical inspection of the area in question, the L.D.A. has found a large guest house by the name of Golden Lion to have been constructed on the area. A copy of a colour photograph taken of the gate of the Golden Lion/Guest House has been enclosed with the said instructions. It has been stated that the order dated 06.08.2025 was passed against Shivram Pandey and not against the petitioner. The demolition, if any, shall be carried out concerning the illegal ploting and constructions done by Shivram Pandey and others. Regarding the petitioner's grievance concerning Khasra No.557Ka Village Borumau, Police Station Sairpur, Tehsil Bakshi Ka Talab, District Lucknow, it has been stated in the said instructions that the petitioner had constructed his house on this area, which falls within the development area of the L.D.A. under the U.P. Urban and Planning Development Act, 1973. Action shall be taken in accordance with statutory provisions of the Act and a notice shall be issued to the petitioner. A copy of such instructions is kept on record. The writ petition is disposed of. October 7, 2025 Mahesh WRIC No. 9693 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAHESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench