Allahabad High Court
THE METHODIST CHURCH IN INDIAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition was dismissed for want of proper particulars establishing the petitioner’s legal status.
Summary
The Methodist Church in India filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. Respondents 2 and 3 objected that the petition was filed in the name of the Church without establishing that it is a legal entity capable of suing. The petitioner’s counsel could not provide any documentation to prove the Church’s corporate status. The Court held that the petition lacked the necessary particulars to establish standing. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, but the Court granted the petitioner liberty to file a fresh petition with proper particulars.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner, "The Methodist Church in India", is a legal entity with locus standi to maintain the writ petition.
Subjects
- legal standing
- locus standi
- writ petition
- entity registration
- preliminary objection
- dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 16368 of 2026
The Methodist Church In India
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Amzad Rza, Raman Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Saurabh Tiwari
Court No. - 4
HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J.
HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Saurabh Tiwari, learned
counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 2 & 3 and learned standing
counsel for the State-respondent nos. 1 & 4.
2. Sri Saurabh Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 2
and 3 has raised a preliminary objection that the writ petition has been
filed in the name and style, 'The Methodist Church In India'. However,
nothing has been brought on record to show as to how the petitioner is a
legal entity so as to maintain the present writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to satisfactorily
respond to the preliminary objection raised by learned counsel for
respondent nos. 2 and 3.
4. In light of the aforesaid facts, the writ petition is dismissed for want of
proper particulars of the petitioner. However, taking a lenient view in the
matter, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a fresh petition with
better particulars.
(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.)
May 6, 2026
Arif
Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD ARIF
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…