Disposed¶10

Mulayam Singh Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Apr 2025WRIA/1955/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; WRIT - A No. 1955 of 2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:47661; decided 04.04.2025 by Ajit Kumar, J.; petitioner Mulayam Singh Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another; Article 226 writ of mandamus; removal of debarment order dated 08.07.2024 re future examinations; controversy sub judice before Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) No.5828 of 2023; directions that no High Court entertain such petitions; earlier related writ Writ A No.12221 of 2024; liberty to seek clarification from Supreme Court; petition consigned to records.

What did the court decide?

Petition consigned to records without adjudication of merits; petitioner given liberty to approach the Supreme Court for clarification regarding consideration of his claim. ¶10

Mulayam Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47661

¶2

Court No. - 4

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1955 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mulayam Singh Yadav Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Pandey,Dhiresh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Prabhakar Awasthi

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶5

Petitioner has challenged the order of debarment

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking writ of mandamus to respondents to remove the debarment order dated 08.07.2024 given to the petitioner in respect of future examinations.

¶8

Sri Siddharth Singhal, learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the said order having not been challenged has attained finality, and secondly he submits that controversy in such matter is already engaging attention of the Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) No.5828 of 2023 in which directions/orders were passed to the effect that no High Court should entertain petitions arising out of such controversy. However, he submits that one such petitioner had approached this Court earlier by filing writ petition being Writ A No.12221 of 2024 in which this Court had directed the petitioner to seek clarification from the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court in that case granted this liberty to the said petitioner to approach the High Court for consideration of his case as a stand alone case.

¶9

In such above view of the matter, I decline to grant indulgence in this matter as the controversy is already sub judice before the Supreme Court. However, if the petitioner wants that his claim may be considered he may approach the Supreme Court for seeking such clarification as Supreme Court may consider appropriate to grant.

¶10

With this above liberty, this petition is consigned to records .

¶11

Order Date :- 4.4.2025

¶12

Deepika

¶13

Digitally signed by :- DEEPIKA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mulayam Singh Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mulayam Singh Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Niwas Pandey vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raghvendra Pratap Singh vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 4 Others

Ram Naresh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shailendra Bhardwaj and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Manmohan Soni and 28 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Asharfi Lal and Another vs State of U.P. and 6 Others