RAKESH KUMAR SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                        WRIT - C No. - 32119 of 2025

Rakesh Kumar Sharma
                                                             .....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                           .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)       : Aditya Kumar Singh, Dharmendra
                                  Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s)       : Abhimanyu Singh Chauhan, C.S.C.,
                                  Tejasvi Misra

Court No. - 29
                 HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J.
                 HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.

1. It is alleged by the petitioner that plot no. C/84, Govindpuram,
Ghaziabad, was allotted to the petitioner. Thereafter when the possession
of the plot was not handed over to the petitioner, the petitioner
approached the District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad, which by its order
dated 6.7.2000 directed the Ghaziabad Development Authority to return
whatever money the petitioner had deposited, with an interest of 12%.

2. It is further case of the petitioner that instead of complying the order of
the District Consumer Forum, the Ghaziabad Development Authority kept
demanding certain amounts which were consequentially also deposited by
the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for Ghaziabad Development Authority Sri Abhimanyu
Singh Chauhan has, however, stated that all such documents which the
petitioner had attached with the writ petition indicating that the Ghaziabad
Development Authority was demanding money are fake and fabricated
documents. The paragraph no. 6 of the personal affidavit is being referred
here as under:-

"THAT, on the basis of the available original records of the case, it is
specifically stated here that the above referred documents, as relied upon
and appended by the Petitioner as Annexure Nos. 08, 09, 10, 11 and 12,
to the writ petition, are nothing else, but, only fake and manufactured
                                                                                         WRIC No. 32119 of 2025
                                                                    2


                                    documents."

                                    4. He, further, submitted that the petitioner challenged the order of the
                                    District Consumer Forum before the State Consumer Forum where no
                                    order was passed in his favour. Now, the said order has been challenged
                                    before the National Consumer Forum and the matter is pending before the
                                    National Consumer Forum.

                                    5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Dharmendra
                                    Kumar, Sri Abhimanya Singh Chauhan and the learned Standing Counsel,
                                    we are of the view that complicated questions of fact are involved in this
                                    case, which cannot be adjudicated in the present writ petition. Therefore,
                                    no interference is warranted.

                                    6. We, however, provide that the petitioner may continue to pursue his
                                    remedy before the consumer forum.

                                    7. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.



                                                               (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.)
                                    September 18, 2026
                                    PK




Digitally signed by :-
PRAVEEN KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad