Disposed

Narayani Prasad Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC15 Sept 2025WRIC/32255/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought mandamus directing the Chief Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits to decide representations dated 18.06.2025 and 16.07.2025. Counsel sought leave to file a fresh representation with a direction for expeditious decision; the State did not object. The court permitted it, fixed six weeks, and disposed of the petition without entering into merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to file fresh representation within 15 days; Chief Registrar to decide it expeditiously, preferably within six weeks.

Narayani Prasad Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Cooperative Societies | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 32255 of 2025

¶3

Narayani Prasad Singh

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sunil Kumar Singh, Vikalp Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

¶6

Court No. - 32

¶7

HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.

¶8

The instant writ petition has been filed seeking the following main prayer:-

¶9

"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 2, i.e., the Chief Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, U.P. at Lucknow, to decide the representations given by the Petitioner dated 18.06.2025 and 16.07.2025 (Annexures Nos. 2 & 3), expeditiously preferably within a stipulated period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court."

¶10

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner without entering into merits of the case, made an innocuous prayer that the petitioner may be permitted to file a fresh representation before respondent no.2 and a direction may be issued to him to decide the same in time bound manner.

¶11

Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents vehemently opposed the writ petition on merits, but has not opposed the innocuous prayer as made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

¶12

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Sri Jitendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel appeared on advance accepted notice on behalf of the State-respondents, perused the contents made in the writ petition and the documents on record.

¶13

Without entering into merits of the case, I am inclined to allow the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶14

WRIC No. 32255 of 2025

¶15

¶16

petitioner as no objection made on behalf of learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of State-respondents. Petitioner is directed to file a fresh representation along with present writ petition as well as certified copy of this order before respondent no.2 within 15 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order. After receiving the said representation, respondent no.2, The Chief Registrar, firms, Societies and Chits, Varanasi is directed to decide the said representation in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receiving of the said representation.

¶17

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

¶18

(Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)

¶19

September 16, 2025 Atul

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Narayani Prasad Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narayani Prasad Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Abhinay Mishra vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Manjay Kumar Sharma vs State of Up and 4 Others

Dev Pati Ram vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Devendra Nath Singh vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Subodh Rajbhar vs Union of India and 3 Others

Dr. Sanjeev Mohan Sharma vs State of U.P. and 4 Others