HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 30683 of 2024 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J. HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Abhyudan Pratap Singh advocate holding brief of Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 1 and Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 4. 2. Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 4 raised preliminary objection and submitted that after issuance of advertisement, petitioner has submitted application offering the land on the same place, which was advertised. After rejection of his application and allotment to some other person, he has filed present petition. She next submitted that once the application has been filed without challenging the advertisement, after rejection of application, petitioner has no right coupled with this fact that on one hand, he offered the land on the very same road, which is mentioned in the advertisement and now here the case is that said location is not in existence, therefore, petition may be dismissed with heavy cost. 3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he does not want to press the petition, therefore, same may be dismissed as not pressed. 4. Accordingly, petition is dismissed as not pressed. 5. No liberty is given to the petitioner to file fresh petition for the same cause of action. October 10, 2025 Arvind Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pawan Kumar Shukla, Rakesh Pathak Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Archana Singh, Manoj Kumar Singh (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.) Pradeep Kumar .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad