Disposed¶10

Nidhi Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko and 4 Others

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2025WRIC/6596/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; WRIT-C 6596 of 2025; Nidhi Shukla v. State of U.P.; income certificate cancellation by Tehsildar; clean hands requirement for writ jurisdiction; husband's business in Ludhiana; several pucca houses owned by family; concealment of facts in obtaining certificate; Court will not quash order to restore another illegality; interim order; case put up after three weeks; order date 18.7.2025; Rajan Roy J.; Manish Kumar J.

What did the court decide?

No final decision or interim relief recorded; the case was ordered to be put up/listed after three weeks for further proceedings. ¶10

Nidhi Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No final decision or interim relief recorded; the case was ordered to be put up/listed after three weeks for further proceedings.

¶10

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner comes to Court with clean hands — i.e., that her husband is not engaged in any business in Ludhiana or elsewhere, and that she or her other family members do not own several pucca houses (the alleged basis for cancellation of the income certificate). +1 more

¶8

Court's answer

The Court directed the petitioner to prima facie satisfy it that her husband is not engaged in any business in Ludhiana or elsewhere and that she or her other family members do not own several pucca houses, since a person invoking the discretionary writ jurisdiction must come with clean hands before the extraordinary jurisdiction is exercised.

¶8

Key takeaways

Conditionally observed that if the petitioner is unable to satisfy the Court on those accounts, the writ petition's ground that the Tehsildar could not have cancelled the certificate may not be made the basis for interference, as the Court will not quash such an order so as to restore another illegality.obiter¶9
Passing observation questioning the writ petition's premise: if the income certificate was obtained by concealing a fact, the Court asked why the Tehsildar could not have cancelled the certificate issued by him.obiter¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Interim order, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (WRIT - C No. 6596 of 2025, Nidhi Shukla v. State of U.P.), dated 18.7.2025, coram Rajan Roy and Manish Kumar, JJ. On hearing counsel in a writ petition challenging the Tehsildar's cancellation of the petitioner's income certificate, the Court directed the petitioner to prima facie establish that she approaches with clean hands — that her husband carries on no business in Ludhiana or elsewhere and that she or her family members own no several pucca houses — observing that a person invoking discretionary writ jurisdiction must first satisfy this before the extraordinary jurisdiction is exercised. The Court further observed, conditionally, that failing such satisfaction, the ground that the Tehsildar could not have cancelled his own certificate may not found judicial interference, as the Court will not quash an order merely to restore another illegality, and questioned why the Tehsildar could not cancel a certificate obtained by concealment of fact. No final decision was recorded; the case was put up after three weeks.

Nidhi Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nidhi Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Savitri Devi vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Govt. of India Central Revenues Bldg. New Delhi and 4 Others

Moharram Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

C/M Maidani Das Kutti , Malik Chalak Jeep Taxi Samiti Thru. President Harish Chandra Rastogi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Urban Development Deptt. Lko. and 8 Others

Shambhu Dayal vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Avas and Shahri Niyojan Lko. and 8 Others

Chanda Kashyap @ Aisha Khatoon vs U.O.I. Thru. Secy. Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and 2 Others

Harinandan vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko and Ors.