Disposed¶17

Committee of Management, Madarsa Rasheedul Uloom, Saraiya Varanasi and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC3 Sept 2025WRIC/30755/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court writ petition WRIT-C 30755 of 2025, Madarsa Rasheedul Uloom Varanasi v. State of U.P., Chandra Dhari Singh J., disposed 04.09.2025; innocuous prayer allowed without merits; Registrar's order dated 17.05.2022 on institutional discrepancies/suspension; fresh representation to respondent no. 3 within two weeks; reasoned speaking order after hearing within two months of certified copy.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions: petitioners to file a fresh detailed representation before respondent no. 3 within two weeks of receiving the certified copy; respondent no. 3 to pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law after hearing, expeditiously preferably within two months of production of the certified copy. ¶17

Committee of Management, Madarsa Rasheedul Uloom, Saraiya Varanasi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent no. 3 should entertain the petitioners' representation for revocation of suspension, on the claim that the discrepancies mentioned in the order dated 17.05.2022 have already been removed.

¶10

Court's answer

Without entering into the merits of the case, the Court inclined to allow the innocuous prayer of the petitioners' Senior Counsel, as no objection was raised by the respondents' counsel.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to file a fresh detailed representation before respondent no. 3 within two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

¶13

Key takeaways

Respondent no. 3 is directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel for respondent no. 3.ratio¶16
The reasoned and speaking order by respondent no. 3 is to be passed expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Chandra Dhari Singh, J.) on 04.09.2025 disposed of Writ-C No. 30755 of 2025 (Committee of Management, Madarsa Rasheedul Uloom, Saraiya Varanasi and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others) without entering into merits. Following the petitioners' innocuous prayer and absence of objection from respondents, the Court directed the petitioner to file a fresh detailed representation before respondent no. 3 (Registrar) within two weeks of receipt of certified copy, seeking revocation of suspension on the ground that discrepancies flagged in the Registrar's order dated 17.05.2022 have been removed; respondent no. 3 was directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing, expeditiously preferably within two months from production of the certified copy. No statute or precedent was cited; no quantum involved.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 30755 of 2025

¶3

Committee Of Management, Madarsa Rasheedul Uloom, Saraiya Varanasi And Another

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. And 4 Others

¶7

	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Santosh Kumar Chaubey
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C., Pranav Mishra

¶8

Court No. - 32

¶9

HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.

¶10

After arguing at some length, on merit of the case, Sri R.K.Ojha, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has made innocuous prayer that the respondent no. 3 may decide the representation of the petitioner revoking the suspension on the ground that the discrepancies which have been mentioned in the order dated 17.05.2022 have already been removed by the petitioners and are of no existence. It is also submitted that the petitioners have represented their case on 21.06.2022 which is appended as annexure 11 to the writ petition.

¶11

Per contra, Sri Pranav Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 vehemently opposed the writ petition on merit and submitted that there are certain discrepancies in the petitioners institution, therefore the order dated 17.05.2022 has been passed by the Registrar. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 further submitted that he has no objection, if the petitioners institution has taken care of all the objections raised by the Registrar at the time of passing of the impugned order dated 17.05.2022 and the petitioners may be directed to represent their case afresh before the Registrar making all averments regarding removal or taking care of the objections which had been raised by the Registrar at the time of passing of the impugned order.

¶12

Heard Sri R.K.Ojha, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents and Sri Pranav Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3.

¶13

Without entering into merits of the case, I am inclined to allow the innocuous prayer made by learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as no objection made on behalf of learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to file a fresh detailed representation before the respondent no.3 within two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. After receiving the said representation, respondent no.3 is directed to

¶14

WRIC No. 30755 of 2025

¶15

¶16

pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners taking into consideration the submissions as made by learned counsel for the respondent no. 3, expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶17

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

¶18

September 4, 2025 Pratima

¶19

(Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- PRATIMA AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Committee of Management, Madarsa Rasheedul Uloom, Saraiya Varanasi and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Committee of Management, Madarsa Rasheedul Uloom, Saraiya Varanasi and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases