HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11027 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Vakalatnama filed today by Shri Naveen Chandra Upadhyay, learned counsel on behalf of respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 is taken on record. 2. We have heard Shri Sanjay Bhasin, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Aviral Raj Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel, who appears on behalf of State-respondent No.1 and Shri Naveen Chandra Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4. 3. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayers :- "I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, to the respondent Nos.1 to 4 for carrying out demolition of the non- compoundable portion of the house, which is being constructed by the respondent No.5 on Plot No.2/22, Vinamra Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, to the respondent Nos.1 to 4 for taking appropriate actions against the respondent No.5, in terms of the order dated 07.05.2025 (Annexure No.15), passed by the Respondent No.4 in Case No.298/2024. III. Direct the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 to adequately compensate the petitioner for violation of her fundamental rights, on account of laxity/ carelessness shown by the officials of the Lucknow Development Authority in the case of the petitioner. IV. Direct that an enquiry/necessary disciplinary proceedings be Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aviral Raj Singh, Ali Moid, Ashutosh Verma, Mohd. Yasir, Palash Banerjee, Vaibhav Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ratnesh Chandra Yamini Mathur And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./ Addl.Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Housing And Urban Planning And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) conducted in the matter against the erring officials of the LDA. V. Allow the costs of the instant Writ Petition in favour of the petitioner and VI. Any other appropriate direction or order, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts of the instant case, in favour of the petitioner." 4. Shri N.C. Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4 raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the petition before this Court, as according to him the petitioners are only neighbours of respondent Nos.5 and 6, who, according to the petitioners are raising illegal constructions. 5. The petitioners cannot be said to be aggrieved persons; they may only be annoyed by the actions of respondent Nos.2 to 4. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners prays that the writ petition be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum. 7. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum. November 14, 2025 Shubhankar WRIC No. 11027 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench