Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 17335 of 2025 Petitioner :- Radhasoami Satsang Sabha Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sr. Advocate,Ujjawal Satsangi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suresh C. Dwivedi Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. Heard Sri Anurag Khanna, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ujjawal Satsangi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State-respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Sri J.N. Maurya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 3 and 4. 2. The petitioner has preffered the present petition inter alia with the following prayer:- "(a) Issue a writ, order or direction, by calling the records, and setting aside the Impugned Order dated 20.02.2025 passed by Respondent No. 2. (b) Issue a writ, order or direction, by calling the records, and setting aside the Impugned Order dated 16.05.2015 passed by Respondent No. 4." 3. Facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that on 27.06.2023 a show cause notice was served upon the petitioner under section 27 of U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 on the pretext that the petitioner has raised construction without permission of the Development Authority. A detailed reply was submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the aforesaid show cause notice but without considering the reply submitted by the petitioner an order dated 16.05.2015 was passed by respondent no. 4/Deputy Secretary, Agra Development Authority, Agra by which the objections raised by the petitioner was rejected. Aggrieved against the aforesaid the petitioner filed an appeal under Sub Section 2 of Section 27 of the Act, 1973 which was also rejected by respondent no. 2/Commissioner, Division-Agra/Chairman, Agra Development Authority, Agra vide order dated 20.02.2025. Aggrieved against the aforesaid the petitioner has preferred the present petition. 4. It is argued by Sri Anurag Khanna, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner that the allegations made in the show cause notice is absolutely false and incorrect and no dwelling house or kitchen has been raised on the property concerned. It is further argued that the provisions of U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 is not applicable upon construction raised for agricultural activities. It is further argued that though a large number of objections were raised in the reply submitted by the petitioner in response to the show cause notice dated 27.06.2013 but the same was not taken into consideration, hence a prayer has been made to set aside the aforesaid order. 5. On the other hand a preliminary objection has been raised by Sri J.N. Maurya, learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner has a statutory alternative remedy to file a revision before the State Government as provided under sub- section (3) of Section 41 of Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 hence it is argued that the present petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of statutory remedy. 6. In this view of the matter, the Court is of the prima facie opinion that the writ petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable as alternative remedy is available to the petitioner and the same is liable to be dismissed. 7. At this point of time, a prayer has been made by Sri Anurag Khanna, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to file revision but some interim protection be granted to the petitioner till the disposal of the aforesaid revision. 8. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to file a revision as provided under sub- section (3) of Section 41 of Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 before the State Government. In case such revision is filed along-with stay application before the State Government within a period of four weeks from today, the Revisional Authority is directed to pass appropriate order at least on stay application within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of revision. 10. For a period of three months from today or till the time an order is passed on the stay application, whichever is earlier, no coercive action is taken against the petitioner. Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Arti Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad