HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 31392 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J. 1. Heard Sri Ram Kirshna Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and Sri A.P.Paul, learned Counsel for Azamgarh Development Authrority. 2. The instant writ petition is preferred for the following relief: "(a) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing ex-parte impugned order of demolition dated 14.08.2025 passed by respondent no.2 in case no. 520 o f2023 (Ashirvad Pathak vs. Azamgarh Development Authority Azamgarh). (b) Issue writ order or direction in the nature mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 not to create any hindrance and not to demolish the house in question in terms of impugned order." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is the original tenure holder and co-sharer of Gata No. 30 area 10.930 hectare situated in village Pathakhauli, Pargana Nizamabad, Tehsil Sadar, District Azamgar. He submits that till date, the Master Plan -2031 has not been approved by the Government and in absence thereof, the impugned proceedings under Section 27(1) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (in short 'Act of 1973') is not sustainable. He further submits that at no point of time any notice has ever been served upon the petitioner and as such Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ram Krishna Mishra, Ramesh Chandra Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anand Prakash Paul, C.S.C. Ashirvad Pathak .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) the impugned order of demolition is contrary to the provisions of law and is liable to be set aside. 4. Sri A.P. Paul, learned Counsel for Azamgarh Development Authrority vehementaly resisted the relief sought by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 14.08.2025 and submitted that despite repeated indulgence, the petitioner failed to turn up before the authority and admittedly he had carried out certain constructions without any approval or sanctioned plan under Section 14 read with Section 15 of the Act of 1973. Moreover, against the order impugned in this writ petition, the petitioner has an efficacious remedy to approach the Divisional Commissioner for ventilating his grievances. 5. Confronted with the situation, we find that in case the petitioner approaches the Authorities for sanction of map along with the plan under Sections 14 and 15 of the Act of 1973 within ten days from today, the Authority shall finalize the said proceeding in accordance with law after according opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. However, in case the petitioner does not submit the map along with the plan within the stipulated period the Authority would be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is accordingly, disposed of. September 17, 2025 Ashish Pd. WRIC No. 31392 of 2025 2 (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH PRASAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad