HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 28968 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J. 1. Heard Sri Adarsh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri F.A.Ansari, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent no. 2 and Sri A.P.Paul, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1. 2. In view of the order, which is proposed to be passed, notice need not go to the private respondent no. 3. 3. The instant writ petition has been preferred for quashing the order impugned dated 2.8.2025 passed by the respondent no. 1 (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition. 4. At the very outset, Sri A.P.Paul, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 raised an objection that against the order impugned, the petitioner has got efficacious alternative remedy to file a revision under Section 41(3) of the U.P.Urban, Planning and Development Act, 1973 before the State Government and as such the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of statutory alternative remedy. 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 the direction that in case any such revision is being preferred by the petitioner within a week's from today, the Authority concerned would proceed to decide the same on its own merit within further two months time but certainly after affording opportunity to all stakeholders in the matter. September 9, 2025 A.K.Srivastava Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Adarsh Singh, Ajeet Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anand Prakash Paul, C.S.C. (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Ajay Kumar Bawa .....Petitioner(s) Saharanpur Development Authority And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad