Allahabad High Court
SUDHIR KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation and the respondent to decide it within a month, without adjudicating the substantive claim for a character certificate.
Summary
Sudhir Kumar petitioned the Allahabad High Court for a character certificate from the Commissioner of Police, Prayagraj, alleging that the authority had not acted on his representations. The State of U.P. and other respondents opposed the petition. The Court, without examining the merits, directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation along with a certified copy of the order within one month. It further ordered the Commissioner to consider and decide the representation within one month, in line with the judgment in Anil Kumar v. State of U.P. The petition was consequently disposed, with the matter left for administrative adjudication.
Issues considered
- Whether the respondent authority is obligated to issue a character certificate to the petitioner upon his representation.
- Whether the writ petition should be entertained on its merits or disposed with a procedural direction.
Subjects
- character certificate
- police commissioner
- writ petition
- administrative law
- representation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 34525 of 2026
Sudhir Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Indresh Kumar, Tribhal Chandra Sharma
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 40
HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J.
HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for
the State-respondents.
2. The grievance of the petitioners is that respondent-authority is not issuing
character certificate to the petitioner despite the fact that petitioner has
submitted representations to the respondent-authority for issuance of the
same, but till date, no action has been taken on the same.
3. Learned Standing Counsel submits that no useful purpose would be served
in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction may be issued
to the respondent no.2 to consider the grievance of the petitioner.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without adverting
into the merits of the case, we dispose off the writ petition permitting the
petitioner to file a fresh representation alongwith certified copy of this order
raising all his grievances before the respondent no.2-Commissioner of
Police, Commissionerate, Prayagraj within a period of one month from
today. In case, any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the
respondent no.2 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law
within a period of one month from the date he receives the representation of
the petitioner in the light of judgement of this Court in the case of Anil
Kumar Vs. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko.
& Others passed in Writ-C No.718 of 2025.
September 9, 2026
Gaurav
(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
GAURAV PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…