Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 111700 (ALL)

RAJESH KUMAR KUSHWAHA v. STATE OF U.P. AND 9 OTHERS

WRIC/42442/2024 · 2025-05-07

Prakash Padia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:76004 Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 42442 of 2024 Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Kushwaha Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar,Mamta Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rajeev Kumar Saxena,Virendra Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. Heard Shri Gyan Chandra, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Mamta Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State. 2. The petitioner has preferred the present petition inter alia with the prayer to direct the respondent no. 2/District Magistrate, District Sonebhadra to decide the representation of petitioner dated 24.10.2024 pending before him expeditiously within stipulated period. 3. On the basis of complaint made by the petitioner an order of recovery has been passed by District Panchayat Raj Officer, Sonebhadra on 29.06.2024 since the same was not complied with, a representation dated 24.10.2024 was submitted by the petitioner, since no action has been taken hence the present petition. 4. Instructions dated 11.04.2025 under the signatures of District Magistrate, Sonebhadra placed before this Court, the same is taken on record. 5. Pursuant to the aforesaid order of recovery which was passed against the respondent nos. 9 and 10 both of them have approached this Court by filing writ petition being Writ C No. 22285 of 2024 and 22664 of 2024. 6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the records. 7. From perusal of records it transpires that on the basis of complaint made by the petitioner a recovery order was passed against the respondent nos. 9 and 10 which has already been stayed by this Court. In this view of the matter, the Court is of the opinion that the relief sought by the petitioner could not be granted. 8. From perusal of records it is also clear that on the representation made by the petitioner dated 24.10.2024 a decision has already been taken. 9. In this view of the matter, the Court is of the opinion that the present petition is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed on both the aforesaid grounds. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 Arti Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad