Allahabad High Court
WRIC/39966/2026 of NEELU SOFAT Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS on 30 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 39966 of 2026 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Sri Mohd. Afzal, learned counsel for respondent No.3. 2. The petitioner has
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 39966 of 2026
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Sri Mohd. Afzal, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
2. The petitioner has preferred the present petition with the following prayer:- I. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the Respondent no. 2, District Magistrate Gautam Buddha Nagar to execute/expedite the recovery process pursuance/compliance of of recoverable amount the Recovery in Certificate No.2144/ यू.पी०रेरा/क्षे०का०/वसूली/2020-21 under Section 40(1) dated 28.01.2021 issued by the Secretary, UP- RERA Authority, Gautam Complaint No. as Buddha Nagar in NCR144/01/0315/2020 (Neelu Sofat Vs. M/s Uttam Steels and Associates (Consortium)/Ansal Hi-Tech Township Ltd. arrears of land revenue along with interest within such period of time as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper; AND/OR
3. In view of the order proposed to be passed herein, no useful purpose would be served by putting the respondent/respondents to notice and keeping this petition pending before this Court. However, in case respondent/respondents feels aggrieved by the order his/her right to seek modification/variation of the order is being kept reserved. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manish Chandra, Rahul Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mohd. Afzal Neelu Sofat .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that despite the recovery certificate dated 28.01.2021 issued by the respondent No.3, no action has been taken by the respondent No.2/District Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar.
5. On the other hand, it is argued by learned Standing Counsel that respondent No.2 will take a decision in the matter expeditiously.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.2/District Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar to take a decision in the matter strictly in accordance with law most expeditiously and preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order unless there is no legal impediment. October 1, 2026 saqlain WRIC No. 39966 of 2026 2 (Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.) Digitally signed by :- SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER High Court of Judicature at Allahabad