Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:130088-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 25635 of 2025 Petitioner :- Satish Chand Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ken Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suresh C. Dwivedi Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J. 1. Heard Shri Ken Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Akhileshwar Singh, learned standing counsel for the State- respondents and Shri Ravi Anand Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 - Agra Development Authority. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed praying inter alia for the following relief: "1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the order dated 27.08.2024 ( not served to the petitioner) passed by respondent no. 2 cancel the allotment of House no M.M.I.G B-379 Kalindi Vihar District Agra. II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent no.2 not to dispossess the petitioner from the House no. M.M.I.GB-379 Kalindi Vihar District Agra." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid residential House No. M.M.I.G B-379, Kalindi Vihar, Agra was originally allotted to the petitioner's father Niranjan Singh by an order dated 29.10.2001 on payment of Rs.2,30,300/- with 17% annual interest payable in 60 equal monthly installments of Rs.10,666/- each. The petitioner's father had been depositing installments regularly until his demise on 12.07.2006. Thereafter, the petitioner continued to deposit the installments as per the original terms and has paid approximately Rs.5,12,000/- till date, with the last payment of Rs.1,00,000/- made on 26.12.2023. It is stated that due to financial hardship and the prolonged illness of his wife, the petitioner defaulted on some installments. Upon approaching the authority on 03.01.2025 to make further payment, the petitioner was informed orally that the allotment stood cancelled. Subsequently, he discovered through an RTI reply dated 25.06.2025 that the cancellation order had been passed much earlier on 27.08.2024, but no notice or opportunity of hearing had been granted to him or other legal heirs of the original allottee. A cancellation notice dated 03.09.2024 was found to have been issued after the cancellation order and that too addressed incorrectly in the name of the deceased allottee at a wrong address. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order dated 27.08.2024 is wholly illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice, as it was passed without serving any show cause notice or affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or other legal heirs of the original allottee. It is argued that the notice dated 03.09.2024 was issued post facto and wrongly addressed, and hence, was never served. On the instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner, being a legal heir in continuous possession of the house, is ready to deposit the outstanding dues in easy installments. Therefore, cancellation of allotment in such circumstances is not only harsh and disproportionate but also contrary to law. Accordingly, he prays for quashing of the cancellation order and for protection from dispossession. 4. Shri Ravi Anand Agarwal, learned counsel for the Agra Development Authority (ADA), submits that considerable leniency had already been shown to the original allottee. In support of his submissions, he relies upon the letter dated 03.09.2024 (Annexure- 2 to the writ petition), and states that multiple notices were issued by the ADA directing deposit of the outstanding dues, the last of which was served on 12.12.2023. Despite repeated opportunities, the dues remained unpaid, leaving the ADA with no option but to cancel the allotment. However, learned counsel further submits that if the petitioner is now willing to deposit the entire outstanding amount within a reasonable period, the ADA may consider restoration of the allotment strictly in accordance with law. 5. Considering the factual matrix of the case, it is evident that the disputed house was allotted to the petitioner's father based on his financial status, and upon his demise in 2006, the petitioner continued in possession and made payments towards the allotment, including last deposit of Rs.1,00,000/- in December 2023. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to issue any positive direction at this stage. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the ADA by filing an appropriate application for restoration of the allotment within one week from today, along with an unequivocal undertaking to deposit the entire outstanding amount, including restoration charges, interest, and penal interest. In such an event, the ADA shall be at liberty to consider the petitioner’s request for restoration of the allotment strictly in accordance with law. It is further observed that if the ADA finds the case fit for restoration, such decision shall be communicated to the petitioner, and the petitioner shall deposit the entire outstanding amount within a further period of six weeks from the date of such communication, failing which the ADA shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 4.8.2025 NLY Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad