Allahabad High Court
MONU KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The petition was dismissed as the petitioner was not entitled to the reliefs sought.
Summary
The petitioner, Monu Kumar, filed a writ petition seeking a certiorari to quash a possession notice dated 13 January 2026 issued by the third respondent, and a mandamus directing the second respondent to consider his bank account open. The petitioner alleged that his account had been placed on hold, preventing him from operating it. The respondents contended that the disputed amount of Rs.21,503 was held and that the petitioner could not access the account. The Court examined the submissions and found no basis to grant the reliefs sought, noting that the petitioner was not entitled to any writ at this stage. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed without any order for costs.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court should grant certiorari to quash the possession notice and mandamus to direct the opening of the petitioner’s bank account.
Subjects
- writ petition
- certiorari
- mandamus
- account hold
- banking
- High Court
- Allahabad
- relief denied
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 17672 of 2026
Monu Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shyam Singh Somvanshi, Udayraj
Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Satish Chaturvedi, Vivek
Mishra
Court No. - 40
HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J.
HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pankaj Kumar Jha
holding brief of Sri Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents
No.1 & 2 and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.3.
2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has prayed for the
following reliefs:
"i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the
impugned possession notice dated 13.01.2026 issued by the respondents
no.3 (contained in Annexure No.1 to writ petition).
ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
the respondents no.2 to consider the petitioner account open (contained
in Annexure No.2 to writ petition)
iii) issue any other writ, order or directions, as this Hon'ble Court deems
fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
iv) award the cost of writ petition in favour of the petitioners."
3. Grievance of the petitioner is that on the basis of the notice dated
13.01.2026, account of the petitioner has been put on hold and in the
aforesaid backdrop, the petitioner has prayed for the aforesaid relief.
4. Sri Pankaj Kumar Jha holding brief of Sri Vivek Mishra, learned
WRIC No. 17672 of 2026
2
counsel for the respondents No.1 & 2 submits that the disputed amount of
Rs.21,503/- has been put on hold and the petitioner cannot operate the
account.
5. In view of the aforesaid statement of Sri Sri Pankaj Kumar Jha holding
brief of Sri Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 & 2,
we do not find that at this stage, the petitioner is entitled to get any relief.
6. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed.
May 6, 2026
SS
(Garima Prashad,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…