Disposed

Hira Singh Rawat and 48 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC16 Sept 2026WRIC/37372/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners sought a direction to execute sublease deeds for flats and to decide their representation concerning the matter. The court declined to keep the writ petition pending and, with the parties’ consent, disposed of it without expressing any opinion on the merits, directing the respondents to consider and decide the representation expeditiously, preferably within three months from production of the certified order.

What did the court decide?

The respondents shall consider and decide the petitioners’ representation dated 27.07.2026 in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within three months from production of the certified copy of the order.

Hira Singh Rawat and 48 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 37372 of 2026

¶3

Hira Singh Rawat And 48 Others

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Lalit Kumar Misra
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C., Kaushalendra Nath Singh

¶6

Court No. - 29

¶7

HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.

¶8

Heard Shri Lalit Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-respondents.

¶9

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

¶10

"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents (especially Respondent No. 2 and 4) to execute sublease deed of flats of Aims Green, Avenue GH-04, Sector-04, Greater Noida West, Gautam Budh Nagar for Phase-1 ABCD Towers in favour of the petitioners/allottee (s) within specified by this Hon'ble Court.

¶11

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents (especially respondent no.2) to take appropriate decision upon the representations of the petitioners dated 27.07.2026 (Annexure No. 4) within time bound manner.

¶12

(c) Issue any other writ which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶13

(d) Award the Cost of writ petition in favour of the petitioners."

¶14

WRIC No. 37372 of 2026

¶15

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners has confined his prayer for a direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioners dated 27.07.2026 within the stipulated period. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance upon the judgment/order passed by the Division Bench in Writ-C No.58 of 2026, Deepak Kumar Dubey and 13 others v. State of U.P. and 3 others.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances, 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 27.07.2026 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.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.)

¶20

September 17, 2026 NLY

¶21

Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hira Singh Rawat and 48 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hira Singh Rawat and 48 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases