Disposed¶13

M/S Maruti Salt Udyog v. State of Up and 2 Others

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2026WRIC/6499/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court interim order in WRIT - C No. 6499 of 2026, M/S Maruti Salt Udyog versus State of UP and 2 others, dated February 18, 2026, Bench: Arindam Sinha and Satya Veer Singh, JJ. Subject: pending application for permission to sell edible salt under guidelines/recommendation dated 24th January, 2020 of respondent no. 3; RTI reply that application was 'not in form'; petitioner's counsel Ashish Goyal; State counsel Raj Mohan Upadhyay (Additional Chief Standing Counsel) sought adjournment for instructions. Matter listed fresh on 10th March, 2026. Keywords: edible salt; sale permission; Right of Information Act, 2005; adjournment; no merits decided.

What did the court decide?

Interim only: matter listed fresh on 10th March, 2026; no final relief granted, the Court having adjourned to enable the State to obtain instructions.

M/S Maruti Salt Udyog vs State of Up and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 6499 of 2026

¶3

M/S Maruti Salt Udyog

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Up And 2 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Ashish Goyal
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

¶9

Court No. - 29

¶10

HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J. HON'BLE SATYA VEER SINGH, J.

¶11

Mr. Ashish Goyal, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client manufactures edible salt. It applied for permission to sell the product in terms of guidelines/recommendation dated 24th January, 2020 issued by respondent no. 3. The application remains pending. His client made query under Right of Information Act, 2005 and received answer that the application was not in form. He submits, according to his client the application was duly made. No discrepancy has been pointed out by the authority. Simply, his client has not been given permission.

¶12

Mr. Raj Mohan Upadhyay, learned advocate, Additional Chief Standing Counsel appears on behalf of State and prays for adjournment to obtain instructions. Either the permission is to be granted or written instruction issued on reason(s) for rejection.

¶13

List on 10th March, 2026 as fresh.

¶14

(Arindam Sinha,J.)

¶15

(Satya Veer Singh,J.)

¶16

February 18, 2026 Jaswant

¶17

Digitally signed by :- JASWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

M/S Maruti Salt Udyog v. State of Up and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Maruti Salt Udyog v. State of Up and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Committee of Management of Hindustan Aeronautics Karamchari Sehkari Awas Samiti Ltd. and Another vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Surya Pal Singh vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

M/S Royal Construction Company vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

M/S Krishna Construction Company and Another vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Lalita Mishra and Another vs Union of India and 3 Others

Dr. Amit Narendra Jain vs Smt. Mitiya Goyal