SMT REENA PATEL v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 4 OTHERS
WRIC/35637/2026 · 2026-09-15
Ajit Kumar, Siddharth Nandan
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 7439 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 7439 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 35637 of 2026 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has prayed for following relief:
"(I). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent authorities to decide the representation dated 25/08/2026 (Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition) moved by the petitioner within a stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."
3. In our considered view, the relief is in the nature of injunction arising out of a pure civil dispute which may involve disputed questions of fact and hence, petitioner may avail remedy of civil suit, if so advised. Accordingly, we decline to grant indulgence in the matter.
4. Subject to aforesaid liberty, this petition is consigned to records. September 16, 2026 Atmesh Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dileep Kumar, Raj Kumar Gupta Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. (Siddharth Nandan,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.) Smt Reena Patel .....Petitioner(s) State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- ATMESH KESARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad