Allahabad High Court
OMWATIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition is not maintainable and is dismissed.
Summary
Omwati filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the authorities to allot plot no. 9 in Sector 16B of the Sikandra Yojna, Agra, and to prevent its allotment to anyone else. The petition relied on a pending Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 25398 of 2004 filed by another applicant, Ashok Kumar Yadav, asserting that the earlier case should stay any plot allotments. The respondents objected that the present petition was filed after an inordinate delay, since the advertisement for the plot draw was in 2003 and the petition was only filed in 2026. The Court examined the objection and held that the delay rendered the petition non‑maintainable and that it would not exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as being without merit.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable despite the inordinate delay in filing.
- Whether the Court can issue a mandamus directing allotment of the plot in view of the pendency of the earlier related writ petition.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Article 226
Subjects
- mandamus
- writ petition
- Article 226
- delay
- plot allotment
- housing scheme
- maintainability
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 14844 of 2026
Omwati
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ayub Khan, Sanjay Agarwal
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pranjal Mehrotra
Court No. - 21
HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J.
HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.
1. Heard Sri Sanjay Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri
Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-
respondents and Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for the contesting-
respondent-U.P.Awas Evam Vikas Parishad.
2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for a mandamus
commanding the respondents-authorities to allot the plot no. 9 to the
petitioner in Sector 16B of Sikandra Yojna Agra of U.P.Awas Evam
Vikas Parishad, Agra Zone, Agra and further prayed for not to allot the
aforesaid plot to any other person.
3. The entire claim has been set upon on the basis of order dated passed
by the Division Bench in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 25398 of 2004
filed by similarly situated incumbent Ashok Kumar Yadav, which is
claimed to pending consideration and request has been made to connect
the instant case with the said petition.
4. At the very outset, learned counsel for the contesting-respondent raised
an objection qua maintainability of the writ petition on the ground of
inordinate delay as the advertisement for draw of plot in question took
place in the year 2003. Even though the petitioner had applied well within
time. Later on, the respondent no. 3 has cancelled the auction dated
23.06.2004. Being aggrieved, another incumbent Ashok Kumar Yadav
who has applied for allotment of plot no. 8 in the scheme in question,
approached this Court by preferring Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 25398
WRIC No. 14844 of 2026
2
of 2004, wherein the Court has pleased to stay the allotment of plots in
question. Merely on the ground of pendency of the said petition, no such
claim can be set up at this belated stage.
5. We have proceeded to examine the record in question and find that the
objection so raised by learned counsel for the contesting-respondent has
force. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to
our discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India.
6. The writ petition sans merit and the same is accordingly dismissed.
(Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)
May 5, 2026
A.K.Srivastava
Digitally signed by :-
ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…