Disposed

Dinesh Kumar Sharma v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Railways New Delhi and 2 Others

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2024/9199/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ of mandamus for disposal of guardianship certificate application under Section 14 of the 1999 National Trust Act. Court noted no such application was received by the District Magistrate's office.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to move application before the District Magistrate concerned if covered by the Act.

Dinesh Kumar Sharma Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Railways New Delhi and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:76206-DB

¶2

Court No. - 2

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9199 of 2024 Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Sharma Respondent :- Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Of Railways New Delhi And 2 Others

¶4

Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Singh,(Amicus Curiae),Shreya Prakash,Shreya Prakash (Amicus Curiae)

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.

¶6

Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶7

Heard Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Shreya Prakash, learned Amicus Curiae for the petitioner, Shri Varun Pandey, learned counsel for the Union of India and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.

¶8

This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus for disposal of application of the petitioner for issuance of a Guardianship Certificate by the District Magistrate.

¶9

On being asked learned counsel submitted that the Certificate is to be issued under Section 14 of the National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999.

¶10

We had appointed Ms. Shreya Prakash as amicus to assist us as to the applicability of the National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999 to the facts of this case. She has ably assisted us and we appreciate her assistance, however, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has instructions to inform the Court that no such application has been received in the Office of the District Magistrate, Lucknow.

¶11

The petitioner, if he is covered by the provision of the aforesaid Act, 1999 and is entitled to make such an application, may move an application before the District Magistrate concerned who shall look into the matter and do the needful as per law.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶13

(Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 19.11.2024/R.K.P.

¶15

Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dinesh Kumar Sharma v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Railways New Delhi and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Kumar Sharma v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Railways New Delhi and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Hazratpur Kisan Seva Samiti Thru. Auth. Rep. Paramjit Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Transport Deptt. Lko and 2 Others

Deepak Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 11 Others

State Bank of India Thru. Its Chief Manager Amit Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Principal Commissioner Cgst and Central Excise Vs Rajesh Kumar Gupta

Bank of Baroda Vibhuti Khand Gomti Nagar Lko Thru. Chief Manager and Authorized Officer Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Finance Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko and 8 Others

Shahnaz and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue U.P. Lko. and 5 Others