DHRUPDEVA FOUNDATION RAMUDEEHA SONVARASA BAJAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS
WRIC/17792/2025 · 2025-07-16
Manoj Kumar Gupta, Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 64164 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 64164 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115899-DB Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 17792 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dhrupdeva Foundation Ramudeeha Sonvarasa Bajar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jai Prakash Rao,Rajesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.
1. Heard Sri R.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajeev Gupta, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 6.
2. The petitioner runs 'AVATAR' De-addiction and Rehabilitation Centre for addicts at Rudrapur Road, Deoria. It is aggrieved by the order dated 13.05.2025, by which respondent No.3 has blacklisted the petitioner and has also
directed for closure of the De-addiction Centre. The aforesaid directions have been issued in pursuance of letter of the State-Government dated 22.04.2025, letter of District Magistrate, dated 24.02.2025 and inquiry report of Five Member Committee constituted for examining the complaint filed by respondent No.7 vide Complaint Case No.19100/24/21/2024 before National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi.
3. The specific case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was not given notice of the proceedings at any stage. The petitioner was also not associated with the inquiry held by the Five Member Committee. It is submitted that the order of blacklisting, which entails serious civil consequences, could not have been passed in such a manner.
4. Sri Rajeev Gupta, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel fairly admits that the impugned order does not indicate that any notice or opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner before it was passed.
5. In view of the above, the impugned order dated
13.05.2025 is hereby quashed, leaving it open to respondent No.3 to issue proper notice to the petitioner and also supply all adverse material to it and after seeking explanation from the petitioner, pass a fresh order strictly, in accordance with law.
6. As a result, the writ petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above. (R.M.N.Mishra, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)
Order Date :- 17.7.2025 Amit Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad