HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 29843 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri Aditya Bhushan Singhal, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and 3 - Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to correct the description of the second and third respondents forthwith. 3. The instant writ petition has been filed praying inter alia for the following relief: "i. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned notice dated 31.01.2025 issued by office of the respondent no. 2 which contain as Annexure no. 3 to the writ petition during pendency of the writ petition. ii. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding to the respondent no. 2 and 3 to drop the proceeding of demolition in pursuant to order dated 03.01.2025 issued by respondent no. 2 during pendency of the writ petition. iii. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding to the respondent no. 2 and 3 to pass an appropriate order upon the application of the petitioner dated 17.05.2025 regarding to compounding of the house/building situated upon the arazi no. 2538 measuring area 0.5235 hectare situated in Mauza Mahawan Tehsil Mahawan District Mathura within stipulated time in the interest of justice." 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer that objection/application 17.05.2025 may be decided by respondent No.2 and 3 expeditiously. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ranjeet Asthana Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Pankaj Sharma .....Petitioner(s) The State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. Shri Aditya Bhushan Singhal, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and 3 - Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority states that in case the said application has not yet been decided, the same would be decided as per law. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to keep the writ petition pending consideration and call for a counter affidavit. 7. Therefore, without adverting on the merits of the case, with the consent of parties, this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to the second respondent i.e. The Officer on Special Duty, Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority to consider the application of petitioner and pass appropriate order, strictly in accordance with law, within six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, but certainly after giving audience to all the stake holders in the matter. September 8, 2025 NLY WRIC No. 29843 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad