HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 22841 of 2022 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J. 1. Heard Sri M. A. Haseen, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri J. K. N. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents no.1 to 3 and perused the records. 2. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayers :- "i). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned order dated 23.06.1972, communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 10.09.2018 (Annexure no. 10 to the writ petition) and the order dated 11.11.2018 (Annexure no. 12 to the writ petition) and the order dated 26.10.2021 (Annexure no. 15 to the writ petition). ii). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents not to implement and give effect the impugned order dated 23.06.1972, communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 10.09.2018 (Annexure no. 10 to the writ petition) and the order dated 11.11.2018 (Annexure no. 12 to the writ petition) and the order dated 26.10.2021 (Annexure no. 15 to the writ petition). iii). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the plots in question under the garb of the impugned orders, what so ever in any manner." 3. The facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that earlier the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : M.A. Haseen Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., C.S.C., Jai Krishna Narain Sharma Rahees Uddin .....Petitioner(s) Custodian Of Enemy Property For India Ministry Of Home Affairs And 11 Others .....Respondent(s) petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ C No.12098 of 2019, which was finally disposed of by this Court vide order dated 08.04.2019. By the aforesaid order, petitioner was directed to approach the Central Government under Section 18 of the Enemy Property Act, 1968. The order reads as follows :- "We have heard Sri M.A.Haseen, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.P. Singh, Additional Solicitor General assisted by Sri S.H.Chauhan, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 and 3 and the learned standing counsel for the State respondent no.4. In view of the order we propose to pass, we are not inclined to issue notice to respondent nos. 5 to 11 since their interest will be protected under the direction issued by us. Sri S.P.Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General has pointed out that against the order the petitioner has remedy to approach the Central Government under section 18 of the Anemy Property Act, 1968, as such the petitioner may approach the Central Government rather than pressing this petition here. Sri Haseen, learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show that such remedy is not available to the petitioner. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the Central Government under section 18 of the aforesaid Act along with a certified copy of this order within four week from today. It is, however provided that upon such approach being made by the petitioner, the authority of the Central Government shall take appropriate decision accordance with law after affording due opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and the concerned stake holders within a period of four months." 4. Pursuant to the aforesaid, representation has been submitted by the petitioner before the Competent Authority on 02.05.2019, copy of which is appended as annexure-14 to the writ petition. 5. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that on the one hand no decision has been taken by the respondents on the aforesaid representation and on the other hand when respondents tried to dispossess the petitioner from plot in question, he filed present writ petition. 6. Today when the matter is taken up, counsel for the respondents no.1 to 3 placed before this Court a decision dated 26.12.2022 passed by Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi, copy of which is provided to counsel for the petitioner. 7. After going through the same, a prayer has been made by counsel for WRIC No. 22841 of 2022 2 the petitioner to dismiss present writ petition as having become infructuous with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the aforesaid order before the appropriate forum. 8. In view of the same, present writ petition is dismissed with liberty as prayed. October 7, 2025 Pramod Tripathi WRIC No. 22841 of 2022 3 (Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad