Allowed¶18

Sandeep Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC30 Apr 2026WRIA/3795/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Manjive Shukla, J.; Writ-A No. 3795 of 2026; Sandeep Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. (Basic Education) and others; C.M.A No.2 of 2026 for recall of order dated 30.04.2026; listing date modified from 29.05.2026 to 19.05.2026 (as fresh); urgency pleaded ahead of summer vacation; respondents' counsel raised no objection; administrative/scheduling order; no statutes or precedents cited; no dissenting opinion; single-judge bench.

What did the court decide?

Modification of the order dated 30.04.2026 so that Writ-A No. 3795 of 2026 is listed before the appropriate Court on 19.05.2026, as fresh. ¶18

Sandeep Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Lko. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 3795 of 2026

Sandeep Kumar Yadav

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Lko. And 4 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Nirankar Singh, Pawan Gupta : Counsel for Respondent(s) C.S.C., Shailendra Singh Rajawat

¶9

Court No. - 21

¶10

HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J.

¶11

(C.M.A No.2 of 2026-Recall of the order dated 30.04.2026)

¶12

Heard Shri Nirankar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Badrish Kumar Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and Shri Shailendra Singh Rajawat, learned counsel for Respondent Nos.4 and 5.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to compelling circumstances he could not appear before this Court on 30.04.2026 when the case was listed in the list of fresh cases and therefore, this Court had passed an order for listing of the case after four weeks on 29.05.2026. He further submits that there is urgency in the matter and on 29.05.2026 being the last working day before the summer vacation, it may not be possible for this Court to take up the matter and thereby the petitioner may suffer irreparable loss. He requests that this matter may be directed to be listed on any date in the week commencing 18.05.2026, as fresh, so that the matter may be heard and decided.

¶14

Learned counsels representing the respondents do not have any objection if the order dated 30.04.2026 is modified to the extent of the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶15

Accordingly, the application is allowed.

¶16

WRIA No. 3795 of 2026

¶17

¶18

The order dated 30.04.2026 is hereby modified and it is provided that the writ petition shall now be listed before the appropriate Court on 19.05.2026, as fresh.

¶19

May 12, 2026

¶20

akhilesh/-

¶21

(Manjive Shukla,J.)

¶22

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

Sandeep Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Lko. 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

Rajnish Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Madhyamik Education Lko. and 4 Others

Anamika Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Shiksha Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Ambika Prasad Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Sahkarita) U.P. Lko. and 9 Others

Neeraj Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Smt. Sangeeta Tiwari @ Sangeeta Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Tushar Sonkar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.