HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 42970 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Sri Ambrish Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Development Authority. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs: "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned advertisement dated 24.11.2025 with the name of Mega E-Auction issued by Respondent no. 2. ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 10.02.2025 passed by respondent no. 4. iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent no. 2, 3 and 4 to allot a similar alternative plot to the petitioner situated at Industrial Area, District - Bulandshahr or any other plot of larger area available in same locality in lieu of the allotted plot, i.e. plot no. VL-51 and to accept the amount as per policy." 3. The petitioner was allotted a plot being Plot No. VL-51. This allotment of the plot was cancelled on 10.02.2025 on the pretext that the land which was acquired for the Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as "UPSIDA") was no longer property of UPSIDA as it had in the consolidation proceeding been allotted to the other tenure- holders. Thereafter, when the petitioner came across a particular Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Chandra Bhan Gupta, Harsh Gupta Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ambrish Shukla, Anuj Pratap Singh, C.S.C. Smt. Lokesh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) advertisement wherein the allottees, who had not been given possession, were invited for participating in an auction, then the petitioner aggrieved by that invitation of other allottees has approached this Court. 4. Sri Ambrish Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the UPSIDA, has submitted that the petitioner in fact as per the order dated 10.02.2025 has been given a 6% interest over the amount which he had deposited in pursuance of the order of the Consumer Forum in complaint no. 67/2023. He further submits that the cheque has also been encashed by the petitioner. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that even if the amount of Rs. 11,41,315.00/- which was given to the petitioner on 05.02.2025 was not in pursuance of the order passed by the consumer forum, it was an amount which was paid to the petitioner in pursuance of the letter dated 10.02.2025. The withdrawal of amount by the petitioner is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner has no right left to get an opportunity to participate in the auction which he desires to participate as per the communication dated 01.07.2025. 6. For all the reasons stated above, we are of the view that the writ petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. 7. If the petitioner is still aggrieved by the interest amount which has been paid, he may approach such forum as might be available to him in accordance with law. September 29, 2026 M.S. Ansari WRIC No. 42970 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD SAQIB ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad