Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:124733-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24363 of 2025 Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hitesh Pachori Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suresh C. Dwivedi Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent; Sri Shiv Prakash Gupta holding brief of Sri J.N.Maurya, learned counsel for the Agra Development Authority and Sri Shubham Prakash Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 6 and 7. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for a mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1 to 3 for effective compliance of the order dated 7.5.2025 passed by respondent no. 3 and also to comply with the provisions of Section 28A(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning & Development Act 1973. Alternatively, prayer is made to decide the representation dated 10.7.2025 by a speaking order within stipulated time. 3. The petitioner is the tenant of one shop (measuring 9x12 feet) situated at ground floor in property no. 3/139 Subhash Bazar, Gali Manpada, Agra on a monthly rent @ Rs. 600/- per month. The respondent no. 6 & 7 had purchased the aforesaid property through registered sale deed dated 19.9.2024. When they tried to evict the petitioner from the shop in question, the petitioner preferred Original Suit No. 942/2024 (Sri Raj Kumar Gupta v. Kundan Lal & another) before the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Agra on 5.12.2024, wherein an interim injunction was accorded in favour of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that even after the order dated 5.12.2024, the private respondents kept on raising construction on the disputed site and also kept on demolishing the surrounding area of the shop. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a complaint dated 1.3.2025 before the second respondent about the unauthorized construction being raised by the respondent no. 6, which was entertained by the Authority and notice u/s 27 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning & Development Act 1973 (in short 'Act 1973) was issued to the respondent nos. 6 and 7 by the respondent no. 3. Later on the unauthorized construction raised by the respondent nos. 6 and 7 was sealed on 8.5.2025 by the respondent no. 3, even thereafter they continue to raise construction work over the disputed site. Such situation impelled the petitioner to approach this Court by means of the instant writ petition. 4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel on the instructions states that at present no construction is going on over the disputed site and the seal is intact. Learned counsel for the Development Authority apprised that against the sealing order, there is efficacious remedy to file an appeal, which is stated to be pending consideration. 5. Considering the factual situation and in view of the categorical instructions, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition on merit at this stage. As the contesting-respondents have already filed an appeal under the Act 1973, they are expected not to carry out any construction over the disputed site in absence of any reprieve by the appellate authority in case the sealing order is there. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 28.7.2025 A.K.Srivastava Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad