Disposed

Abhishek Yadav v. Union of India and 7 Others

Allahabad HC17 Feb 2021WRIC/5132/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction to the respondent authorities to decide his representation for a No Objection Certificate for a Bio Diesel Fuel Retail Outlet. The court disposed of the petition, directing the authorities to decide the representation strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within three weeks, after affording an opportunity to all stakehol

What did the court decide?

Directed the competent authority to decide the petitioner's representation for N.O.C. strictly in accordance with law and expeditiously, preferably within three weeks.

Abhishek Yadav Vs Union of India and 7 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5132 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Abhishek Yadav Respondent :- Union Of India And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Puneet Bhadauria Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent.

¶6

In pith and substance, the petitioner is before this Court with a request commanding the respondent authorities to decide the application/representation dated 4.8.2019 for granting 'No Objection Certificate' to the petitioner with regard to Bio Diesel Fuel Retail Outlet situated at Arazi Gata No. 186 of Village Bhabali, Tehsil Sirasaganj, District Firozabad.

¶7

Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel very fairly states that in case the aforementioned representation is still pending for consideration, the same will be considered and decided expeditiously by the competent authority.

¶8

In the facts and circumstances, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction to the competent authority to decide the aforementioned representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within three weeks time from the date of production of a copy of this order before him but certainly after affording opportunity to all stakeholders in the matter.

¶9

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶10

The concerned Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerised copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶11

Order Date :- 17.2.2021 A.K.Srivastava

Abhishek Yadav v. Union of India and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Yadav v. Union of India and 7 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

Geeta Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Krashn Kant Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

M/S Sri Ram Bala Ji Traders Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Green Bay Plot and Flat Buyers Welfare Association Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

M/S Zygon Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs New Okhla Industrial Development Authority and Another