Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:144883-DB Court No. - 40 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 28314 of 2025 Petitioner :- Neelu Singh Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Girdhar Prasad Tripathi Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J. Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos.1 & 2 and learned counsel for respondent no.3. 2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has assailed the notice dated 31.07.2025 issued by the Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Ballia whereby petitioner has been directed to vacate the Block No.2-5, Arazi No.48/2, 48/3, 48/4 and 48/5 hectare situated at Meena Bazar, Ballia. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that she is a tenant of the shop for the last 25 years and when landlady i.e. respondent no.4 attempted to vacate the petitioner forcefully, she instituted Original Suit No.884 of 2018 which is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division) (East), Ballia. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that now the respondent no.4 has attempted to vacate the petitioner through other means and impugned notice is the consequence of one such attempt. It s contended that before issuing the impugned notice directing the petitioner to vacate the shop, a notice and opportunity of hearing ought to have been given to the petitioner under Section 263 of U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 which has not been given to the petitioner, and if notice had been given to the petitioner, the petitioner would have demonstrated that the building is not in ruinous condition. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents would contend that the question as to whether the building is in ruinous condition is a question of fact, and therefore, such question of fact cannot be adjudicated by this Court in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, he submits that matter may be relegated to the competent authority, who can look into the all aspects of the matter. 6. In view of the aforesaid submission, the writ petition is disposed off permitting the petitioner to file a detailed representation alongwith certified copy of this order before the respondent no.3- Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Ballia against the impugned notice dated 31.07.2025 within a period of three weeks from today. In case, any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the respondent no.3 shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law after giving due notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as respondent no.4 within a period of three weeks from the date he receives the representation of the petitioner. 7. For a period of six weeks or till the representation of the petitioner is decided, whichever is earlier, the building in question shall not be demolished. Order Date :- 22.8.2025 Sattyarth (Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J) (Saral Srivastava,J) Digitally signed by :- SATTYARTH ANAND High Court of Judicature at Allahabad