Allahabad High Court
SATISH KUMAR TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed as not pressed, and the petitioner is barred from filing a fresh petition on the same cause of action.
Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the second respondent to decide a representation dated 20-07-2026, as mandated by a civil judge's order dated 28-01-2025. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel requested that the petition be dismissed as not pressed, and this request was not opposed by the standing counsel for the state respondents. The court accepted the petitioner's request and dismissed the writ petition on the ground that it was not pressed. The judgment further clarified that the petitioner is not permitted to file another petition on the same cause of action. No substantive discussion on the merits of the representation was undertaken. The order was signed by the two judges of the Allahabad High Court on 8 September 2026.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate procedural disposition when a writ petition is deemed not pressed?
- Whether the petitioner can be barred from filing a fresh petition on the same cause of action.
Subjects
- writ petition
- not pressed
- dismissal
- fresh petition barred
- civil procedure
- representation
- Allahabad High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 34375 of 2026
Satish Kumar Tiwari
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kaushal Kumar Ojha, Vinod Pandey,
Yogesh Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.
1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with the
following prayer:-
"(a) Issue an order or direction, to the Respondent no. 2 to decide the
Representation dated 20-07-2026 in pursuance to the order passed by
Civil Judge Junior division dated 28.01.2025, expeditiously within a time
bound period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."
2. After some arguments, a prayer has been made by the counsel for the
petitioner to dismiss the present petition as not pressed.
3. This prayer has not been opposed by the learned Standing Counsel
appearing on behalf of State-Respondents.
4. Prayer is allowed.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed.
6. It is made clear that no liberty whatsoever is granted to the petitioner to
file a fresh petition for the same cause of action.
(Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.)
September 8, 2026
Swati
Digitally signed by :-
SWATI PATHAK
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…