HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 31285 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Tej Bahadur Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Kaushelndra Nath Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent- NOIDA Authority and Sri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-respondents. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred praying inter alia for the following relief: "1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order/notice dated 15.07.2025 passed by the Senior Manager, Work Circle 8, NOIDA, Gautam Budh Nagar i.e respondent no.4 ; 2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents from interfering with the construction raised by the petitioner on plot in question situated in Village-Salarpur Khadar, Pargana & Tehsil-Dadri, District- Gautam Budh Nagar 3. During the pendency of the writ petition, the final order has been passed on 08.09.2025 under section 10 of the U.P. Industrial Area Development Act, 1976 which has appended as SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit. 4. At the outset, Sri Kaushlendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-NOIDA has raised an objection qua the maintainability of the instant writ petition against the order dated 08.09.2025 as the petitioner has an efficacious remedy for redressal of his grievance before the Revisional Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sr. Advocate, Tej Bahadur Rai Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Kaushalendra Nath Singh M/S Onyx Builders .....Petitioner(s) The State Of Uttar Pradesh And 7 Others .....Respondent(s) Authority under section 41(3) of the U.P. Urabn Planning and Development Act, 1973. He further submits that once efficacious remedy is available to the petitioner, such dispute cannot be pressed at this stage. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of his submission, has placed on the order dated 01.09.2025 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ -C No.28840 of 2025. 6. As such, considering the factual situation and the objections so raised by learned counsel for the NOIDA Authority, we are not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition at this stage on account of efficacious remedy available to the petitioner under section 41 (3) of the U.P. Urabn Planning and Development Act, 1973. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation/application before the Revisional Authority i.e. State Government within a period of two weeks from today and the same shall be considered along with stay application in accordance with law within a period of six weeks thereafter. 8. Till the disposal of the stay application, parties shall maintain status quo as on date. The petitioner shall also be restrained not to carry out any further development in the instant case. October 8, 2025 Sumit S WRIC No. 31285 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad