PIL sought an independent inquiry into alleged corruption by Nagar Palika Parishad, Jayas officials based on RTI information obtained by others. The court found the petition fell short of the requirements laid down in State of U.P. v. Balwant Singh Chaufal and the High Court Rules, and dismissed it.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1182 of 2025
Shujat Ali
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of U.P. through Prin. Secy., Urban Development, Lko. and 6 others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sheikh Mohammad Ali, Brijesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : Nishant Shukla (A.C.S.C.), Alok Kumar Mishra
Chief Justice's Court
HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J.
WPIL No. 1182 of 2025
2
registered post on 10.10.2025 and filed the present petition.
(Jaspreet Singh, J.) (Arun Bhansali, CJ.)
November 19, 2025
Harshita/P.Sri.
Digitally signed by :- HARSHITA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the PIL met the locus standi and disclosure requirements for entertaining a public interest litigation against municipal officials.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Uttaranchal Vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal and othersRelied on¶5
2010 (3) SCC 402 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shujat Ali
State of U.P. through Prin. Secy., Urban Development, Lko.
Respondent Nos. 2-4 (unnamed in text)
Respondent No. 5
Respondent No. 6
Respondent No. 7
Arun Bhansali
Jaspreet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
