Disposed¶13

Guddu and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC18 Mar 2026WRIC/9296/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, WRIT - C No. 9296 of 2026, decided 19.03.2026; bench Saral Srivastava & Sudhanshu Chauhan, JJ.; caste certificate; online application not decided; direction to Tehsildar, Tehsil Hunnaur, District Sambhal to decide representation under law within one month; petition qua petitioner no.2 dismissed as not pressed with liberty; no statute or precedent cited; decided without entering merits.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of: petitioner no.1 permitted to file a fresh representation with certified copy of the order before respondent no.4-Tehsildar, Tehsil Hunnaur, District Sambhal within one month, which respondent no.4 shall decide in accordance with law within one month thereafter; writ petition dismissed as not pressed qua petitioner no.2 with liberty to file a fresh petition. ¶13

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent-authority is bound to consider and decide petitioner no.1's pending online application for issuance of a caste certificate.

¶11

Court's answer

Without adverting into the merits, the writ petition qua petitioner no.1 was disposed of permitting him to file a fresh representation alongwith certified copy of the order raising all his grievances before respondent no.4-Tehsildar, Tehsil Hunnaur, District Sambhal within one month.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

If such a representation is filed by petitioner no.1, respondent no.4 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law within one month thereafter from the date of receipt of the representation.

¶16

Key takeaways

The writ petition so far as petitioner no.2 is dismissed as not pressed, with liberty to petitioner no.2 to file a fresh petition.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (WRIT - C No. 9296 of 2026), High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Saral Srivastava and Sudhanshu Chauhan, JJ.), decided March 19, 2026 — Caste certificate — Petitioner no.1 alleged that the respondent-authority was not issuing a caste certificate despite his online application (Annexure no.1). Learned Standing Counsel conceded that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending. Without adverting into merits, the Division Bench disposed of the petition permitting petitioner no.1 to file a fresh representation with certified copy of the order before respondent no.4-Tehsildar, Tehsil Hunnaur, District Sambhal within one month, with a direction to the Tehsildar to consider and decide the representation in accordance with law within one month of receipt. Petition dismissed as not pressed qua petitioner no.2, whose caste-certificate application could not be filed, with liberty to file a fresh petition.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 9296 of 2026

¶3

Guddu And Another

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others			.....Resp	ondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Dharmendra Kumar Sharm	Kumar a	Patel,	Lavlesh
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

¶6

Court No. - 40

¶7

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

¶8

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

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioners has confined his prayer only to petitioner no.1. He submits that application of petitioner no.2 with regard to seeking caste certificate could not be filed. Accordingly, he submits that present writ petition in respect to petitioner no.2 may be dismissed as not pressed with liberty to petitioner no.2 to file a fresh petition.

¶10

In view of the aforesaid submission, the writ petition so far as petitioner no.2 is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner no.2 to file a fresh petition.

¶11

The grievance of the petitioner no.1 is that respondent-authority is not issuing caste certificate to the petitioner despite the fact that petitioner has already applied online for issuance of caste certificate, copy of application with reference number is annexed as Annexure no.1 to the writ petition.

¶12

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.4 to consider the grievance of the petitioner.

¶13

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 no.1 to file a fresh representation alongwith certified copy of this order raising all his grievances before the respondent no.4-Tehsildar, Tehsil Hunnaur, District Sambhal within a period of one month from today. In case,

¶14

WRIC No. 9296 of 2026

¶15

¶16

any such representation is filed by the petitioner no.1, the respondent no.4 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of one month thereafter from the date he receives the representation of the petitioner no.1.

¶17

March 19, 2026 Sattyarth

¶18

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

¶19

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

Guddu and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu and Another 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ramji Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anurag Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bijendra Kumar and 10 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raja Babu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Krishna Rawat vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others