HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 28905 of 2026 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J. 1. Heard Sri Anirudh Singh holding brief of Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following relief:- "(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned Notice dated 02.07.2026 (Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent No.4 (Secretary, Land Management Committee, Village Puraina, Khandi Chaura, Tehsil Sadar, District Mahrajganj) as well as entire proceeding pursuant thereto against the petitioners. (b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing respondents/Authorities not to proceed with the impugned notice dated 02.07.2026 (Annexure No.3 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent No.4 (Secretary, Land Management Committee, Village Puraina, Khandi Chaura, Tehsil Sadar, District Mahrajganj) and not to dispossess and also not to demolish the house of the petitioners over the land of plot No. 1286 having area 0.1940 Hectare situated in Village Puraina, Khandi Chaura, Tehsil Sadar, District Mahrajganj or may direct the parties to maintain status quo." Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sanjay Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sudhir Bharti Mukti Devi And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that inspite of order dated 07.01.2004 wherein the State authorities have settled the alleged plot with the petitioners since they were continuing since long and now without taking note of the same, the impugned notice dated 02.07.2026 has been issued under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, which proceeding is illegal and is liable to be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel representing the State has submitted that it may be the earlier order of 2004 have not been taken note of but the petitioners are at liberty to give proper reply along with all documents, as the order impugned is just a notice. The writ petition, as such, is premature since there is no cause of action as on date. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is clear that the petitioners are impugning the notice under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code and they are having right to object, therefore, this writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to submit their reply to the said notice dated 02.07.2026 within a period of 15 days from today along with all supporting documents. In the event, such a reply is submitted, the respondent no. 3 shall proceed to decide the same within next four weeks, by passing a speaking and reasoned order. 6. As an interim measure, till such an order is passed, the status-quo as on today, shall be maintained with respect to land in question. September 23, 2026 gp WRIC No. 28905 of 2026 2 (Vivek Saran,J.) Digitally signed by :- GANESH PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad