HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 14844 of 2026 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Sanjay Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State- respondents and Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for the contesting- respondent-U.P.Awas Evam Vikas Parishad. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for a mandamus commanding the respondents-authorities to allot the plot no. 9 to the petitioner in Sector 16B of Sikandra Yojna Agra of U.P.Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Agra Zone, Agra and further prayed for not to allot the aforesaid plot to any other person. 3. The entire claim has been set upon on the basis of order dated passed by the Division Bench in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 25398 of 2004 filed by similarly situated incumbent Ashok Kumar Yadav, which is claimed to pending consideration and request has been made to connect the instant case with the said petition. 4. At the very outset, learned counsel for the contesting-respondent raised an objection qua maintainability of the writ petition on the ground of inordinate delay as the advertisement for draw of plot in question took place in the year 2003. Even though the petitioner had applied well within time. Later on, the respondent no. 3 has cancelled the auction dated 23.06.2004. Being aggrieved, another incumbent Ashok Kumar Yadav who has applied for allotment of plot no. 8 in the scheme in question, approached this Court by preferring Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 25398 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ayub Khan, Sanjay Agarwal Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pranjal Mehrotra Omwati .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) of 2004, wherein the Court has pleased to stay the allotment of plots in question. Merely on the ground of pendency of the said petition, no such claim can be set up at this belated stage. 5. We have proceeded to examine the record in question and find that the objection so raised by learned counsel for the contesting-respondent has force. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to our discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. The writ petition sans merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. May 5, 2026 A.K.Srivastava WRIC No. 14844 of 2026 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad