Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 190347 (ALL)

SANTRAM v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. FOOD AND CIVIL SUPLIES LKO AND 4 OTHERS

WRIC/10196/2025 · 2025-10-17

S Q H Rizvi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 10196 of 2025 Court No. - 20 HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1. Heard Shri Anadi Kumar Singh, learned counsel for petitioner, Shri Vishal Tehlani, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. In view of the proposed order being passed, notice to respondent no. 5 is dispensed with. 3. By means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed that a writ of Mandamus be issued directing the District Supply Officer, District Sitapur (respondent no. 3) to take appropriate action over the alleged illegal act of respondent no. 5. It is also prayed that a direction may also be issued to Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Mishrikh, District Sitapur (respondent no. 4) to consider the grievance of the petitioner and other village members and decide the complaint/representation dated 17.07.2025. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has been provided instructions/letter dated 14.10.2025 by Sub Divisional Officer, Sitapur, which is taken on record. 5. Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions submits that the complaint of the petitioner has already been considered by means of order dated 30.08.2025 passed by District Supply Officer whereby a penalty of Rs.1,000/- has been imposed upon the respondent no. 5 and appropriate directions have been issued to him to be followed in future. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anadi Kumar Singh, Shailendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Santram .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food And Civil Suplies Lko And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 6. Learned counsel for petitioner did not dispute the aforesaid statement made by learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondent. 7. In view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant writ petition at this stage, therefore, the same is consigned to record. 8. Needless to say that it is always open for the petitioner to avail appropriate remedial action, in accordance with law, against the aforesaid order dated 30.08.2025, if he so desires. October 17, 2025 Virendra WRIC No. 10196 of 2025 2 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench