Kashinath Patel vs State of Up and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Kashinath Patel vs State of Up and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim protection: no coercive action against the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned assessment order dated 28.09.2024 till the next date of listing (9.03.2026); respondent No.5 (Welfare Board) granted two weeks to seek instructions; case to be listed fresh on 9.03.2026; no final decision on merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned assessment order dated 28.09.2024 can stand against the petitioner when he is neither the owner of the land nor of the constructions raised over it, the construction having allegedly in fact been raised by his nephew Amit Patel s/o Sri Kamleshwar Patel +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Interim direction only, no merits decided: till the next date of listing (9.03.2026), no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned assessment order dated 28.09.2024.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Interim order, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Arun Kumar, J., February 11, 2026) in WRIT - C No. 4495 of 2026, Kashinath Patel v. State of U.P. and others. Petitioner challenges an assessment under Section 5 of the Building and Other Construction Workers' Welfare Cess Act, 1996 read with Rule 7 of the Cess Rules 1998 (impugned assessment order dated 28.09.2024) alleging he raised construction of estimated cost Rs. 65,00,000/- without depositing Workmen Welfare Cess amounting to 1% of the cost of construction. Petitioner contends the construction was in fact raised by his nephew Amit Patel s/o Sri Kamleshwar Patel, that the land belongs to Amit Patel per revenue record, that no show cause notice under the Act, 1996 was served on him, and that notices were sent to Amit Patel's address at Chandauli though he resides at Varanasi. The Court permitted impleadment of the Building and Other Constructions Workers Welfare Board as respondent No.5, granted it two weeks to seek instructions, and directed that till the next date (9.03.2026) no coercive action be taken against the petitioner in pursuance of the assessment order dated 28.09.2024.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - C No. - 4495 of 2026

Kashinath Patel

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of Up And 3 Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Ravishankar Chaurasia
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Umesh Chandra Kesarwani, C.S.C.

Court No. - 36

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead Building and Other Constructions Workers Welfare Board, Vibhuti khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow through its Secretary, as respondent No.5 in the array of parties of the writ petition during the course of the day.

Sri Umesh Chandra Kesarwani, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of the newly impleaded respondent No.5.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that an assessment under Section 5 of the Building and Other Construction Workers' Welfare Cess Act, 1996 read with Rule 7 of the Cess Rules 1998 was made against the petitioner stating that he has raised construction of a building whose estimated cost is Rs. 65,00,000/- but did not deposit the Workmen Welfare Cess amounting to 1% of the cost of construction.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said construction is said to be raised by the petitioner has in fact being raised by his nephew Amit Patel s/o Sri Kamleshwar Patel. He has placed reliance on the revenue record to show that the land over which the constructions has been raised belongs to Amit Patel. It is further contended that no show cause notice under the aforesaid provisions of the Act, 1996 was served on the petitioner. It is further contended that the petitioner resides at Varanasi wherein notices has been sent at the address of Amit Patel at Chandauli. The entire proceedings stands vitiated as the

WRIC No. 4495 of 2026

2

petitioner is neither the owner of the land nor the constructions raised over it.

Matter requires consideration.

Learned counsel for the newly impleaded respondent No.5 prays for and is granted two weeks time to seek instructions in the matter.

List this case as fresh on 9.03.2026.

Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned assessment order dated 28.09.2024.

(Arun Kumar,J.)

February 11, 2026

SFH

Digitally signed by :- SYED FAHIM HUSAIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad