Pankaj Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2025WRIA/18966/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; WRIT - A No. - 18966 of 2025; Vikas Budhwar, J.; decided December 16, 2025. Keywords: maintainability of writ petition; locus standi; petition by complainant; Anganwadi Karyakatri engagement; co-villager petitioner; no interference; liberty to respondents to verify entitlement of respondent No. 5 in accordance with law; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is not maintainable: the petitioner, a resident of the same village where respondent No. 5 is engaged as Anganwadi Karyakatri, has no locus standi and the petition is that of a complainant; interference is accordingly declined. ¶¶11

Pankaj Singh vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 18966 of 2025

Pankaj Singh

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 4 Others			.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Himanshu Tiwari	Kumar	Sharma, Rajeev
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.
Court No.- 34

¶7

HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

¶8

Heard Shri Mahesh Kumar (A/M 0261/2020), learned Advocate holding brief of Shri Rajeev Tiwari, learned counsel for the writ petitioner as well as Shri Mainsh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶9

A preliminary objection has been raised by the learned Standing Counsel for the State that the writ petitioner appears to be a resident of the same village, wherein respondent No. 5 has been engaged as Anganwadi Karyakatri. He submits that the writ petitioner has no locus standi and the present writ petition is nothing but a petition by a complainant and may not be maintainable.

¶10

Learned counsel for the writ petitioner could not dispute the said position.

¶11

Accordingly, interference is declined, since the writ petition itself is not maintainable. However, it is open for the respondents to take a call regarding the entitlement or admissibility of respondent No. 5 strictly in accordance with law.

¶12

In view of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of .

¶13

(Vikas Budhwar,J.)

¶14

December 16, 2025

¶15

Anurag/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pankaj Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nav Prayas and Another vs State of Uttar Pradesh and Another

Jiya Ram Verma vs Dr. Om Prakash Gupta, Deputy Director of Education, Ayodhya and Another

Rupendra Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anoop Kumar Ahirwar vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Kumar Srivastava vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Omveer Singh vs the State of U.P. and Another