HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 10219 of 2026 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner by means of the present petition has assailed the notice dated 18.02.2026 issued by the respondent no.3. 3. A preliminary objection has been raised by learned counsel for respondents that against the order impugned, there is a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 83(9) of the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995. 4. The aforesaid fact is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Since, there is statutory remedy of filing appeal under Section 83(9) of the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995 against the order impugned, therefore, present petition is not maintainable before this Court. 6. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. March 18, 2026 Sattyarth Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajesh Kumar Kanojia Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Punit Kumar Gupta (Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Humayuun Abbas Zaidi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- SATTYARTH ANAND High Court of Judicature at Allahabad