WRIC/11318/2025 of M/S EVERGREENS LEISURE CLUB AND RESORTS LLP THRU. AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI MANJEET SINGH TALWAR Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOUSING AND URBAN PLANNING DEPTT. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS on 25 November 2025

1. Vakalatnama filed today by Shri Nishant Shukla, learned counsel on behalf of respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri H.G.S. Parihar, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Pragya Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel, who appears on behalf of State-respondent No.1 and Shri Nishant Shukla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4.

3. This petition has been filed with the following prayers :- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned notice dated 12.11.2025 issued by the opposite party no.4 contained as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 15.10.2025 passed by the opposite party no.3, as referred in the notice dated 12.11.2025 issued by the opposite party no.4, as contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition, after summoning it in its original from the opposite parties.

(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to remove the seal of the premises of the petitioner as mentioned in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition forthwith and further not to interfere in the functioning of the petitioner and running of the club activities on "Golf Club and Santushti Enclave Kiora Restaurant situated in Sushant Gulf City, District Lucknow.

(iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties no.2 to take a decision in time bound manner on the application dated 24.05.2025 contained in Annexure 4 to Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Meenakshi Singh Parihar, Pragya Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ratnesh Chandra M/S Evergreens Leisure Club And Resorts Llp Thru. Authorized Signatory Sri Manjeet Singh Talwar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing And Urban Planning Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)

the writ petition.

(v) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just, fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

(vi) to allow the writ petition with costs."

4. Shri Nishant Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 4 has raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, as it has been submitted that the order dated 15.10.2025, which has been challenged in the writ petition, has been passed under Section 28A of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1973"). Such order is amenable to statutory appeal under Section 28A(4) of the Act, 1973.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the availability of the statutory remedy, but he says that since order dated 15.10.2025 has not been served upon him, he cannot file the appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the respondents, on our direction, has given a copy of the order dated 15.10.2025 to the counsel for the petitioner today in Court.

7. This petition is disposed of without entering into the merits of the case, with a direction to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority under Section 28A(4) of the Act, 1973 within three days from today.

8. It has been informed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that certain perishable items are within the premises which have been sealed of KIORA restaurant, which was being run by the petitioner. Such perishable items may be allowed to be taken out by the respondents.

9. We direct the respondent No.4 to accompany the Shri Manjeet Singh Talwar, authorized signatory of the petitioner along with his employees, tomorrow itself in morning at 10 a.m. and allow the petitioner to remove the perishable items which are lying in the sealed premises and other effects and an inventory shall be made which shall be signed by both parties of the items removed from the sealed premises.

10. Since the order impugned has been served upon the petitioner today itself, the appeal shall be decided on its merits, without looking into the limitation prescribed under the Act, as expeditiously as possible. November 25, 2025 Shubhankar WRIC No. 11318 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench