Disposed

Seraj Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 Jan 2021WRIC/22306/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court, in writ petition seeking mandamus for deciding a grievance regarding sand/moram activation, directed the respondent to decide the reference expeditiously within six weeks of the order's communication, reserving decision on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no.1 to decide the reference expeditiously within six weeks of the order's communication.

Seraj Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 22306 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Seraj Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jai Singh Parihar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Yadav,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.

¶5

Sri Jai Singh Parihar, learned counsel appears for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶6

Petitioner by way of present petition seeking following reliefs:

¶7

"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents particularly respondent no.1 to decide the grievance of petitioner referred by respondent no.3 vide letter dated 24.08.2020 expeditiously within stipulated time fix by this Hon'ble court.

¶8

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to issue the Form-C and extend the time of petitioner for selling the sand/moram.

¶9

(c) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to seize the sand/moram of petitioner till it's disposal by petitioner.

¶10

(d) Issue any other order or direction which this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case, so that justice may be done.

¶11

(e) the cost of the petition to the petitioner."

¶12

Earlier on 10.12.2020 and 05.01.2021 learned Standing Counsel was called upon to seek instructions. When the matter is taken up today, it is stated by the learned Standing counsel that the issue raised in the present petition has been referred to the State Government by the District Collector, Fatehpur.

¶13

In view thereof since the matter is under an active consideration by respondent no.1, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition with a direction to the respondent no.1, Principal Secretary, Mines Civil Secretariat, Lucknow, U.P.. to decide the reference expeditiously; however not later than six weeks' from

¶14

the date of communication of this order.

¶15

It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.

¶16

No costs.

¶17

Order Date :- 12.1.2021 N Tiwari

¶18

(Jayant Banerji, J.) (Sanjay Yadav, J.)

Seraj Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Seraj Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharmendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Brijesh Kumar Rai Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohammad Shahid and 2 Others Vs State of U P and 7 Others