Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82950-DB Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15842 of 2025 Petitioner :- Deepender Singh Chauhan @ Deepu Chauhan Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manu Khare Counsel for Respondent :- Anand Prakash Paul,C.S.C.,R. B. Singh Parmar Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by orders dated 24.03.2025 and 05.04.2025 issued by respondents no. 4 and 5 respectively. By order dated 24.03.2025, the Secretary, Kanpur Development Authority, Kanpur has rejected the objection of the petitioner to the effect that he cannot be compelled to submit compounding map of the hotel and restaurant by Kanpur Development Authority, inasmuch as the land over which the same is in existence falls within limits of Zila Panchayat and from whom he already has a sanctioned plan. It has been held that the building is situated in village Bhauti Pratappur, which falls within the limits of 'development area' of Kanpur Development Authority, notified on 06.12.1983. By communication dated 05.04.2025, respondent no. 5 has informed the petitioner that the map got sanctioned by him from Zila Panchayat is null and void for the aforesaid reason. It is stated that the petitioner should submit compounding plan, failing which proceedings under Section 27 of U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 would be initiated against him. 2. The main case of the petitioner is that the land over which the building is situated, is beyond the limits of the development area notified under the Act. On the other hand, as noted above, the Kanpur Development Authority has placed reliance on a notification dated 06.12.1983 in returning the finding that the said area is duly notified as development area. 3. Sri A.P. Paul, learned counsel for Kanpur Development Authority concedes that Government Order dated 06.12.1983 stands superseded. He has placed for our perusal another notification dated 05.09.1986 and he submits that thereby Village Bhauti Pratappur has been duly notified as development area. 4. Sri Manu Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said notification is in fact a notification issued under Section 117 of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 and since the land in question is private land, therefore, there is no question of its resumption. 5. Concededly, the notification dated 05.09.1986 on which reliance is being placed, has not been considered by Kanpur Development Authority while issuing the impugned order. Consequently the petitioner also never had the opportunity to submit any objection in relation thereto. As the subject land is admittedly not covered by notification dated 06.12.1983 but Kanpur Development Authority relies on some different notification, which has not been considered in the impugned order, therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned order, as it stands, cannot be sustained and is hereby quashed. The matter is remanded back to the Authority for issuing a proper notice to the petitioner disclosing the basis on which it claims that the constructions fall within the limits of its jurisdiction and in which event, it shall be open to the petitioner to file appropriate objections and thereafter fresh order would be passed strictly in accordance with law. 6. In result, the petition succeeds and is allowed. (Anish Kumar Gupta, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Order Date :- 19.5.2025 gp Digitally signed by :- GANESH PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad