Disposed¶18

Adityaagarwal and 22 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 May 2026WRIC/16201/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, WRIT - C No. - 16201 of 2026, decided May 6, 2026; mandamus for execution of sublease deed; Ajnara Homes (Tower N and 0) allottees; Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority; representation/application dated 15.04.2026; direction to decide representation within three months; Ram Kishore Arora Vs. Bank of Maharashtra (Civil Appeal No.11052 of 2025, Apex Court, 16.12.2025) relied on by counsel; writ petition disposed of with consent without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' representation dated 15.04.2026 in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within three months from the date of production of certified copy of the order. ¶18

Adityaagarwal and 22 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 16201 of 2026

¶3

Adityaagarwal And 22 Others

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. And 3 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Santosh Kumar Singh, Vishnu Sharma Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anjali Upadhya, C.S.C.

¶8

Court No. - 21

¶9

HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.

¶10

Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Anjali Upadhya, learned counsel for the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority and Sri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-respondents.

¶11

The instant writ petition has been preferred inter alia for the following relief :-

¶12

"1) Issue a writ of Mandamus or an order, direction commanding the respondents (especially respondent no. 2 and 4) to execute sublease deed in favour of petitioners/allottee(s) of Ajnara Homes (Tower N and 0) within time specified by this Hon'ble Court.

¶13

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents (especially respondent no.2) to take appropriate decision upon the application of the petitioner dated 15.04.2026 (Annexure No.5) within time bound manner."

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioners has confined his prayer for a direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioners dated 15.04.2026 within the stipulated period. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court dated 16.12.2025 passed in Civil Appeal No.11052 of 2025; Ram Kishore Arora Vs. Bank of Maharashtra & Ors .

¶15

WRIC No. 16201 of 2026

¶16

¶17

We have perused the material available on record and no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending consideration.

¶18

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition stands disposed of with an observation that the representation moved by the petitioners dated 15.04.2026 shall be considered and decided in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶19

(Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)

¶20

May 6, 2026

¶21

Sumit S

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Adityaagarwal and 22 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adityaagarwal and 22 Others v. State of U.P. 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

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Narendra Kumar Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Babita Agarwal Vs State of U.P. & 2 Others

Anil Sharma and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Harish Chandra and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Chhatar Pal Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Mohan Lal Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 20 Others