Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1883 (UTT)

MADARSA ISLAMIYA MIGTA UL ULOOM v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPMS/843/2026 · 2026-04-07

Pankaj Purohit

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:2442 SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPMS No.843 of 2026 Madarsa Islamiya Migta-Ul-Uloom --Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others --Respondents Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Faizan Ali, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel for petitioner. 2. Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel with Mr. Bhupendra Singh Koranga, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand/respondents. 3. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby, petitioner has sought a writ of mandamus to permanently unseal the premises of the petitioner-Madarsa Islamiya Mifta-Ul-Uloom situated at village Sahaspur Paragna Pachwadoon, Tehsil Vikasnagar, District Dehradun, on his giving an undertaking to the respondent- Authority that in future petitioner will not operate Madarsa in-question without due recognition by State under the rules and regulations. 4. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his case is covered by the judgment and order of the Co- ordinate Bench dated 26.08.2025 in WPMS No.835 of 2025 Madarsa Inamul Ulum Society Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, and batch of writ petitions. 2026:UHC:2442 5. Learned State Counsel does not dispute the contention made by learned counsel for petitioner that the matter is covered by the aforesaid judgment. 6. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of in light of the aforesaid judgment and order. 7. Pending application also stands disposed of. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 07.04.2026 PN