HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 30715 of 2025 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. List has been revised. No one is present on behalf of the respondent no.2. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondent no.1 3. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 08.07.2025 passed by the respondent no.2 directing the petitioner to demolish the House No. 189/234 Nakas Kona, District Prayagraj has preferred this petition. 4. Challenging the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioners are the true owner of the house in question, and by playing fraud, the respondent nos. 3 and 4 got a sale-deed executed in respect to the house in question. It is submitted that the petitioners have instituted original suit for cancellation of sale-deed. It is submitted that the petitioner is in possession over the house in question, and the impugned order has been passed without giving any due notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner whereas it is mandated under Section 331-A of the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1959 that before passing any order of demolition, the occupant of the house shall be given notice and opportunity of hearing. 5. Be that as it may, the impugned order reflects that no notice or opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners before passing the impugned order. 6. In such view of the fact, the writ petition is disposed off permitting the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pradyumna Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Harshit Pandey, Shreshtha Yadav Mohan Lal And 5 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) petitioners to file a detailed representation against the order dated 08.07.2025 before the respondent no.2-Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Prayagraj within a period of one month from today. In case any such representation is filed by the petitioners, the respondent no.2 shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law after giving due notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as well as to the respondent nos.3 & 4 and after supplying all the material to the petitioners which the respondent authorities rely against the petitioners to establish that the house in question is in ruinous condition within a period of three months. 7. Till the disposal of the representation of the petitioners by the respondent no.2, respondents shall not proceed to demolish the house in question. September 11, 2025 Gaurav WRIC No. 30715 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad