Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:107240-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20038 of 2025 Petitioner :- Panna Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Imran,Syed Safdar Ali Kazmi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Somya Chaturvedi,Vibhu Rai Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard Shri Safdar Ali Kazmi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Vibhu Rai, learned counsel for the Development Authority, Shri Fuzail Ahmad Ansari, learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondent. 2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ, order, or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the demolition notice dated 05.06.2025, issued by the Prayagraj Development Authority, Ghaziabad (hereinafter referred to as "P.D.A."). A further prayer has been made for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents from interfering in the peaceful possession of the petitioner over his property situated at Arazi No.68, situated at Gram Chak Bajupur, Tehsil Sadar, District Prayagraj. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the P.D.A. has raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, contending that the petitioner has directly approached this Court without availing the alternative and efficacious statutory remedy available under Section 27(2) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973. 4. Confronted with the said objection, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners may be permitted to approach the appropriate authority under the aforesaid statutory provision. 5. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, this Court finds substance in the preliminary objection raised by the learned counsel for the contesting respondents. The availability of a statutory and alternative equally and efficacious remedy under Section 27(2) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 cannot be ignored, and there appears to be no exceptional circumstance justifying bypassing of such remedy. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to seek redressal of grievance before the appropriate authority in accordance with law. Order Date :- 7.7.2025 A. Tripathi Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad