Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10909 (ALL)

MUKUND TOMAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

WRIA/16099/2026 · 2026-09-30

Manju Rani Chauhan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 16099 of 2026 Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Mr. Dinesh Kumar holding brief of Mr. K. Shahi, learned counsel for respondent No. 2. The petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition with a prayer to direct respondent No. 2 to consider his candidature for allotment of district as per preference filled by him, considering his quality point marks and placement of his name at Serial No. 512 in the select list published by respondent No. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner's matter is pending consideration before the respondent no. 2, however, no orders have yet been passed. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that the petitioner's matter will be decided by the respondent authority expeditiously. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusal of record, a direction is issued to respondent No. 2 - Secretary, Basic Education Board, U.P. at Prayagraj to consider and decide the petitioner's grievance in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, by means of a reasoned and speaking order. The writ petition petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs. October 1, 2026 DS Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Girish Chandra Maurya Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Kushmondeya Shahi (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) Mukund Tomar .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- DIGAMBER SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad