Disposed¶14

Sadashiv Mani Tripathi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC17 Mar 2026WRIC/10222/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Character certificate; non-consideration of representations; writ of mandamus; disposal without merits; liberty to file fresh representation; direction to District Magistrate, Kushinagar to decide within one month; reliance on Anil Kumar v. State of U.P., Writ-C No.718 of 2025; Allahabad High Court; WRIT - C No. 10222 of 2026; decided March 18, 2026; Saral Srivastava and Sudhanshu Chauhan, JJ.; petitioner Sadashiv Mani Tripathi; counsel Mohammad Azad Khan; C.S.C. for State.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a fresh representation with certified copy of the order before respondent no.2-District Magistrate, District Kushinagar within one month; respondent no.2 directed to consider and decide it in accordance with law within one month of receipt, in light of Anil Kumar (Writ-C No.718 of 2025). ¶14

Sadashiv Mani Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 10222 of 2026

¶3

Sadashiv Mani Tripathi

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. And 2 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Mohammad Azad Khan
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

¶9

Court No. - 40

¶10

HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶12

The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent-authority is not issuing character certificate to the petitioner despite the fact that petitioner has submitted several representations to the respondent-authority for issuance of the same, but till date, no action has been taken on the same.

¶13

Learned Standing Counsel submits that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction may be issued to the respondent no.2 to consider the grievance of the petitioner.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without adverting into the merits of the case, we dispose off the writ petition permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation alongwith certified copy of this order raising all his grievances before the respondent no.2-District Magistrate, District Kushinagar within a period of one month from today. In case, any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the respondent no.2 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date he receives the representation of the petitioner in the light of judgement of this Court in the case of Anil Kumar Vs. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. & Others passed in Writ-C No.718 of 2025.

¶15

March 18, 2026 Sattyarth

¶16

(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SATTYARTH ANAND High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sadashiv Mani Tripathi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadashiv Mani Tripathi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Ramkrishna Garg and Suppliers vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

M/S Ramkrishna Garg and Suppliers vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mahafooj Ali vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Kuldeep Narayan Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. and 13 Others

Smt Prema Devi Vs Regional Transport Authority Kanpur and Others

Chandra Pal Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another