Upendra v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Allahabad HC20 Jan 2026WRIB/176/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Writ - B No. 176 of 2026, Upendra v. State of U.P. and 7 others; single bench of Kshitij Shailendra, J.; order dated January 20, 2026. Keywords: lawyers' strike / abstainment of work by Bar Association; proceedings restored pursuant to order of recall; last opportunity granted; officer cannot be blamed for non-decision; petition not dismissed in interest of parties; matter listed fresh on 23.03.2026; petitioner to file upto date order sheet; reference to Supreme Court decisions holding lawyers' strikes illegal (no citation named).

What did the court decide?

Petition not dismissed; matter to be put up as fresh on 23.03.2026, with the petitioner to bring on record the upto date order sheet of the proceedings on the next date fixed. ¶¶15

Upendra vs State of U.P. and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition not dismissed; matter to be put up as fresh on 23.03.2026, with the petitioner to bring on record the upto date order sheet of the proceedings on the next date fixed.

¶¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the officer concerned can be blamed for not deciding the matter, where proceedings stood restored pursuant to an order of recall, last opportunity was granted, and the Bar Association thereafter went on abstention of work. +1 more

¶¶12

Court's answer

The Court cannot blame the officer concerned for not deciding the matter, as after restoration pursuant to an order of recall and grant of last opportunity to advance arguments, the concerned Bar Association went for abstainment of work by the lawyers.

¶¶12

Ratio / Principle

Taking into consideration the interest of the parties who may not suffer on account of abstainment of work by lawyers, the petition is not being dismissed.

¶¶14

Key takeaways

Strikes by lawyers have already been held illegal by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in various decisions; it is for the parties to pursue the Bar Association or their counsel not to obstruct hearing of the matter on account of any kind of resolution.obiter¶¶13
On the next date fixed, the upto date order sheet of the proceedings shall be brought on record by the petitioner.ratio¶¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ - B No. 176 of 2026 (Allahabad High Court, Kshitij Shailendra, J., order dated January 20, 2026): Where proceedings stood restored pursuant to an order of recall and last opportunity had been granted to advance arguments, but the concerned Bar Association thereafter went for abstainment of work by lawyers, the Court held it could not blame the officer concerned for not deciding the matter. Observing that strikes by lawyers have already been held illegal by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in various decisions, the Court stated it is for the parties to pursue the Bar Association or their counsel not to obstruct hearing. Considering the interest of the parties, the petition was not dismissed; it was directed to be put up as fresh on 23.03.2026, with the petitioner to bring on record the upto date order sheet of the proceedings on the next date.

Upendra v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Upendra v. State of U.P. and 7 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

Similar cases

Praveen Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Umashankar vs State of U.P.

Sonam Kumari and Another vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others

Santosh Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P.

Meva Ram and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Arjun vs State of U.P. and Another