Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 81716 (ALL)

JAYBHAGVAN v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/25983/2025 · 2025-08-12

Prashant Bilgaiyan Registrar J Criminal, Shekhar B Saraf

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:138067-DB Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 25983 of 2025 Petitioner :- Jaybhagvan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Srivastava,Atul Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- Alok Mishra,C.S.C. Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf,J. Hon'ble Praveen Kumar Giri,J. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State and Sri Alok Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 to 4. 2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner has sought the following substantial relief: "I. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Inspection Report dated 29.06.2017 (Annexure - 1 to the present writ petition); II. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Notice of Provisional Assessment dated 18.07.2017 issued by the Executive Engineer (Respondent No. 4) (Annexure-2 to the present writ petition); III. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Final Assessment dated 28.11.2019 issued by the Executive Engineer (Respondent No. 4) (Annexure-3 to the present writ petition); IV. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition restraining the Respondent Authorities concerned from taking any coercive action against the Petitioner and from proceeding in terms of the Notice of Provisional Assessment dated 18.07.2017 or the Final Assessment dated 28.11.2019." 3. Upon perusal of the documents, it is clear that the petitioner has approached this Court after almost six years of passing of the final assessment order. 4. It is to be noted that writ Court jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is discretionary and laws of limitation though do not apply upon the writ Court, the High Courts and the Supreme Court have upheld that any person approaching the writ Court must do so with clean hands and with due diligence. Such inordinate delay without any explanation for the same cannot be entertained. 5. The writ petition, is accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 Kuldeep (Praveen Kumar Giri, J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf, J.) Digitally signed by :- KULDEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- KULDEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad