This writ petition was dismissed as it lacked merit. The court held that since the housing scheme did not explicitly state that allotment was based solely on economic criteria rather than reservation category, the authority's order was not illegal or contrary to law.
Petition dismissed; interim order, if any, vacated.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 29821 of 2017
Petitioner :- Sumitra And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prabhakar Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Order Date :- 27.2.2019 KA
Sumitra And 3 Others
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Sudhir Agarwal
Rajendra Kumar-IV
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
