Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 77604 (ALL)

VINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/25273/2025 · 2025-09-21

Prakash Padia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 25273 of 2025 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. 1. The petitioner has preferred the present petition with the following prayers:- a. a writ, order, rule or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 26-5- 2025 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.P. at Lucknow whereby Revision Petition No.70 of 2024 Vinod Kumar Dwivedi and others Vs. R.S. Singh has been dismissed (Annexure No.12 to the petition). b. a writ, order, rule or direction, in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 25-6-2024 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gautambuddh Nagar whereby review application i.e. MA/6/2024 filed in Complaint No.632 of 2022 R.S. Singh Vs. Vinod Kumar Dwivedi and others has been dismissed (Annexure No.7 to the petition). 2. It reveals from perusal of the order dated 26.05.2025 which under challenge by way of prayer No.1 that the aforesaid order Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar Bashist Singh, Amit Saxena Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Nikhil Kumar, Vagish Yadav Vinod Kumar Dwivedi And 2 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) has been passed in the absence of counsel for the petitioner. 3. Today when the matter is taken up, preliminary objection has been raised by learned counsel for the respondents that against the aforesaid order, a recall application has already been filed by the petitioner on 17.06.2025 which is still pending which is also stated in paragraph 25 of the writ petition, therefore, the present petition is not maintainable. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. From perusal of the record, it is clear that against the order dated 26.05.2025 passed by the respondent No.2, a recall application as provided under Section 50 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2009 has already been preferred by the petitioner on 17.06.2025 which is still pending. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and without interfering the order dated 26.05.2025 passed by the respondent No.2, the present petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.2 to decide the application dated 17.06.2025 strictly in accordance with law expeditiously and the petitioner is permitted to raise all the objections before the respondent No.2 while arguing the aforesaid application. September 22, 2025 saqlain WRIC No. 25273 of 2025 2 (Prakash Padia,J.) Digitally signed by :- SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER High Court of Judicature at Allahabad