Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:128338-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 25233 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Nidhi Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhirendra Narain Awasthi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shiv Prakash Gupta Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri D.N. Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-respondent nos.1 and 2 and Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel for respondent nos.3 and 4-Kanpur Development Authority. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner with a prayer for setting aside order dated 28.06.2025 passed by respondent-Development Authority to demolish the construction on 30.07.2025 constructed over plot no.80, 81, 82, 83, 84, Vasudha Vihar, Jarauli, Kanpur Nagar admeasuring 82.52 sq. yard i.e. 69 sqm. 3. At the outset, Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondent-Kanpur Development Authority placed reliance on order dated 19.04.2025 which has been passed under section 26A of U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 regarding illegal construction/without any title over Plot no.80, 81, 82, 83, 84, Vasudha Vihar Jarauli, Kanpur Nagar and date was also fixed for carrying out the demolition. Later on, the aggrieved party had invoked the appellate forum and preferred for a suit for injunction before the competent court. He submits that Additional District Judge, Court no.23, Kanpur Nagar vide order dated 28.04.2025 had accorded interim injunction in favour of the incumbent in M.A. No.83 of 2025. He further submits that once the injunction order was placed before K.D.A., it has not carried out the demolition. He further apprises the court that the petitioner has not preferred any such appeal and the competent court has not awarded any such injunction in her favour. 4. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as respondent-Kanpur Development Authority is at present not carrying out demolition over the plot in question, we are not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition. Needless to say that, in case the petitioner is aggrieved, it is always open to her to invoke appropriate remedy as contemplated under law. 5. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 31.7.2025 Manish Himwan (Prashant Kumar,J.) (M.C. Tripathi, J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad