Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115904-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 22762 of 2025 Petitioner :- Virendra Rai Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandan Kumar Chaturvedi,Rahul Jain Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent. 2. In view of the order, which is proposed to be passed today, notices need not go to the private respondent. 3. The instant writ petition has been preferred for quashing the notices dated 5.4.2025 and 7.4.2025 issued by the respondent no.3. 4. At the very outset, learned Standing raised two-fold objections qua the maintainability of the writ petition. Firstly, the writ petition is premature as the same has been preferred against the impugned notices without responding to authority concerned. Secondly, against the finalisation of the proceeding, the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy under the Uttar Pradesh (Regulation of Building Operations) Act, 1958. 5. In the facts and circumstances, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of finally with a leave to the petitioner to file an objection along with the relevant revenue record/map sanctioned before the competent authority within a week time from today. In case, the petitioner files any such objection within the stipulated time, the competent authority would proceed strictly, in accordance with law, to decide the same as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a further six weeks time but certainly after affording opportunity to all stakeholders in the matter. Order Date :- 17.7.2025 A.K.Srivastava Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad