Disposed¶25

Syed Ali Hasnain Abidi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing and Urban Planing Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC24 Apr 2026WPIL/376/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Garbage dumping site Rustampur; shifting of dumping yard from residential area; Municipal Corporation U.P.; door-to-door garbage collection; cleaning and barricading of dumping place; stray animals; PIL disposed of with observations; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Arun Bhansali CJ; Jaspreet Singh J.; 2026.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with observations; no express direction to shift the dumping site. Grievance noted as addressed for the present following cleaning and barricading, with the respondents expected to continue keeping the environment clean and to regularly collect and appropriately dispose of garbage generated at the locality. ¶25

Syed Ali Hasnain Abidi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing and Urban Planing Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should shift the garbage dumping site and provide a clean and pollution-free environment to the residents of Rustampur. +1 more

¶11

Court's answer

The grievance raised in the petition (garbage dumping affecting Rustampur) has been taken care of for the present.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

The respondents are expected to continue to keep the environment clean and to ensure that garbage naturally generated at the locality is regularly collected and disposed of appropriately.

¶24

Key takeaways

The rejoinder offered no reason for seeking removal of the barricading once the place formerly used for garbage dumping had been cleaned and barricaded.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No. 376 of 2026, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Lucknow Bench), decided 18 May 2026 (Arun Bhansali, CJ and Jaspreet Singh, J): Petition by Syed Ali Hasnain Abidi sought directions to shift a garbage dumping site and provide a clean, pollution-free environment to residents of Rustampur. By interim order of 24 April 2026 the Court, noting photographs showing the area littered with garbage and stray animals, directed the respondent Corporation to clean the entire area, remove the garbage and attend to the stray animals, and to place on record efforts being made to shift the dumping yard located within the residential area. Pursuant thereto, an affidavit dated 11.05.2026 recorded that the area had been appropriately cleaned and barricaded to prevent dumping; the petitioner's rejoinder sought removal of the barricading without stating any reason. Finding the grievance addressed 'for the present', the Court disposed of the petition, observing that the respondents are expected to continue to keep the environment clean and to ensure regular collection and appropriate disposal of garbage generated at the locality.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 376 of 2026

¶3

Syed Ali Hasnain Abidi

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Housing and Urban Planning, Lucknow and others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajesh Kumar Kashyap Counsel for Respondent(s) : Rajnish Kumar Singh, V.P. Nag (A.C.S.C.), Shailendra Singh Chauhan

¶9

Chief Justice's Court

¶10

HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J.

¶11

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking direction to the respondents to shift the garbage dumping site and provide clean and pollution free environment to the residents of Rustampur through appropriate instructions.

¶12

When the matter came up before this Court on 24 April 2026, following order was passed:

¶13

"2. This petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondents to shift the garbage dumping site from the area in question.

¶14

The pictures, which have been produced along with the writ petition, reflect a very sorry state of affairs, wherein the entire area is littered with garbage, stray animals and apparently none has taken care of the area for a long time and/or instead of dumping the garbage at the dumping place, the garbage is being dumped outside on the road.

¶15

Counsel appearing for the Municipal Corporation, based on instructions, attempted to make submissions, seeking to accuse the residents of the area in not subscribing to the door-to-door collection of garbage, however, the fact situation, as noticed hereinbefore, appears to be otherwise, wherein the garbage lying does not apparently appear to be that of the residents of the area only.

¶16

The respondent Corporation is directed to ensure that before the next date, the entire area in question is cleaned/garbage is removed and the stray animals are taken care of.

¶17

WPIL No. 376 of 2026

¶18

¶19

Further, qua the dumping yard which is stated to be located within the residential area, whatever efforts are being made for shifting of the said yard, shall also be placed on record.

¶20

List the petition on 11 May 2026, as fresh."

¶21

Pursuant to the said order, affidavit dated 11.05.2026 was filed inter alia indicating that the area in question has been appropriately cleaned and has been barricaded to ensure that the garbage is not dumped at the said place.

¶22

A rejoinder to the said affidavit has been filed inter alia seeking direction to remove the said barricading made by the respondents.

¶23

Nothing has been indicated in the rejoinder as to once the place which was being used for garbage dumping has been cleaned and barricaded, why prayer for removal of the barricading is being made.

¶24

Apparently, the grievance as raised in the petition, has been taken care of for the present. However, it is expected of the respondents to continue to keep the environment clean and ensure that garbage, which is naturally generated at the locality, is regularly collected and disposed of appropriately.

¶25

With the above observations, the petition stands disposed of .

¶26

(Jaspreet Singh, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)

¶27

May 18, 2026 Asheesh/AHA

¶28

Digitally signed by :- ASHEESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Syed Ali Hasnain Abidi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing and Urban Planing Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Ali Hasnain Abidi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing and Urban Planing Lko. and 3 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

State Project Director U.P. Education for All Project Council Lko. and Another vs Manju Saxena and 17 Others

Aditya Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Animal Husbandry Lko. and 5 Others

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Affairs Govt. of U.P. Lko. and Others vs Tribhuvan Tyagi and Others

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Shri Ajay Chauhan U.P. P.W.D. Lko and Another vs Chandan Pathak

Rohit Kumar Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 5 Others

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Language Civil Sectt. Lko and 2 Others vs Dinesh Kumar Mishra and 19 Others