Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

VINOD KUMAR YADAVversusState of UP AND 4 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The order of August 2024 rejecting the petitioner’s claim is quashed as perverse and unsupported, and the matter is remitted for a fresh, reasoned inspection and order.

Summary

The petitioner, a society registered under the U.P. Goshala Act, 1964, filed a writ petition under Article 226 challenging an order dated August 2024 that rejected its claim for payment under a government order of September 2023, on the ground that it was a religious institution running a goshala. The authority had relied on an exception clause in a February 2019 government order to bar the claim, despite the petitioner’s contention that no material showed it was a religious or commercial cow shelter. The respondents argued that an inspection in September 2024 found only one animal and the manager absent, indicating the society was not actually operating a goshala. The Court held that the impugned order was passed casually, without reference to any documentary evidence, and its findings were perverse and unsupported. Consequently, the Court quashed the order and remitted the matter for a fresh, reasoned inspection and order within two months, provided the society remains registered under the Act.

Issues considered

  • Whether the authority erred in rejecting the petitioner’s claim on the basis that it is a religious institution running a goshala.
  • Whether the exception clause of the government order dated 11 February 2019 applies to the petitioner’s claim.
  • Whether the order of August 2024 was passed with sufficient material and proper procedure.
  • Whether the petitioner’s registration under the U.P. Goshala Act, 1964, entitles it to claim payment.

Legislation cited

  • U.P. Goshala Act, 1964

Subjects

  • U.P. Goshala Act
  • Article 226
  • religious institution
  • cow shelter
  • government order
  • quashing order
  • fresh inspection
  • administrative law

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                        WRIT - C No. - 40073 of 2024

Vinod Kumar Yadav
                                                            .....Petitioner(s)
                                  Versus

State Of Up And 4 Others
                                                         .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)         : Km. Madhubala, Mithilesh Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s)         : C.S.C.

Court No. - 1
                HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
                HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to add Jai Bajarang
Goshala Seva Samiti, Village – Kauria, Post – Towa Nondon, Tehsil –
Nizamabad, district- Azamgarh through its Manager as petitioner claims
to be Manager of the Seva Samiti, which is registered under U.P. Goshala
Act, 1964.

2. The impleadment shall be done immediately as Sri Sandeep Singh,
learned Brief Holder appearing for the State respondents has no objection.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner’s
society continues to have renewal of its registration under the said Act as
on date, though the documents appended with the petition shows that last
renewal was granted w.e.f. 23rd April, 2019 for a period of five years.

4. Heard Sri Mithilesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and Sri Sandeep Singh, learned Brief Holder appearing for the
State respondents.

5. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution,
petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated August, 2024 though
rejecting his application for claiming payment of money from the Chief
Development Officer/ competent authority of the district under the
Government order dated 20th September, 2023.

6. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the authority
has manifestly erred in rejecting the claim on the ground that petitioner is
a religious institution which is running goshala and, therefore, would be
barred from raising such claim even though registered under the U.P.
Goshala Act, 1964.

7. This view has been taken by the authority competent in the matter
pursuant to the Government order dated 11nd February, 2019, which
                                                       WRIC No. 40073 of 2024
                                 2


creates such a bar vide its clause 2.1 (iv).

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed before us
government order dated 2nd January, 2019 which lays down a policy for
taking care of such animals of cow progeny as with the passage of time
and use of mechanical tools for agriculture work, those have rendered
useless and hence use of these animals have got reduced to the negligible
extent and also the government order dated 11th February, 2019 which
creates such a bar.

9. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the order
impugned does not refer to any such documents from which it could have
been inferred that the petitioner's society was a religious society and was
running a cow shelter/ goshala of animals of cow progeny for itself and
for commercial purposes.

10. Meeting the submissions, learned Brief Holder appearing for the State
respondents submits that after the order impugned was passed in the
month of August, 2024 and inspection was done of the cow shelter of the
petitioner being run in the name of goshala, on 6th September, 2024 by
the Chief Veterinary Officer, Azamgarh along with the Block
Development Officer and other Veterinary Officers of Mirzapur and there
only one animal was found and the manager was also not found on the
spot and even after the correspondence being made he did not respond.
Thus, it is contended that petitioner in fact is not running of cow shelter,
rather has set up a case in the name of society registered under the U.P.
Goshala Act, 1964 for maintaining claims.

11. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and having
perused the records, we find that the order impugned was passed in a most
casual manner without referring to any such material on the basis of
which petitioner’s cow shelter was taken to be falling within the
exception clause of the government order dated 11th February, 2019 and
the authority has been so casual in passing the order that even the date of
order has not been mentioned in the order. We further find that the
subsequently inspection has been carried out only to improve upon the
order impugned.

12. It is settled legal proposition that no amount of counter affidavit can
improve upon the order impugned as the order impugned is to be tested
on the basis of the findings taken therein. We find the findings, therefore,
to be absolutely perverse being not supported by any documents even
through the counter affidavit and hence we are not able to sustain the
order.

13. Accordingly, an undated order of August, 2024 passed by the Chief
Development Officer, Azamgarh impugned in this petition as Annexure -
1 is hereby quashed. The writ petition is allowed.
                                                                                           WRIC No. 40073 of 2024
                                                                   3


                                    14. The matter is remitted to the authority again to pass a order afresh
                                    after carrying out a fresh inspection of the cow shelter of the petitioner in
                                    his presence.

                                    15. The inspection shall be carried out and final order shall be passed
                                    within a period of two months from today provided of course, petitioner’s
                                    society continues to be registered under the U.P. Goshala Act, 1964.

                                    16. Needless to add, the order to be passed by the authority concerned as
                                    directed herein above, shall be reasoned and speaking one.



                                                                (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    Atmesh




Digitally signed by :-
ATMESH KESARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.