Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
282 judgments · newest first · showing 201–282
Shreya, an unmarried daughter of a deceased Assistant Teacher, filed a writ petition seeking a compassionate appointment under the U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974. After her mother’s death, her father remarried and expelled Shreya and her younger …
The High Court considered a second bail application filed by Triveni Prasad, who is charged under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for murder. The applicant argued that five witnesses had turned hostile, the trial was delayed, and there was no risk of flight or tampering. The State contended …
The writ petition filed by Chhotu Singh Yadav remained pending since 2021. The High Court had issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the case marked to show that …
The writ petition filed by Kumari Seema against the State of Uttar Pradesh and five other respondents has been pending since 2021. The High Court issued a notice directing that all old cases up to 2022 be heard in the first round and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. …
Ruqaiya Begum @ Sheela filed a bail cancellation application (No. 316 of 2023) before the Allahabad High Court. The applicant's counsel, Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan, failed to appear on multiple occasions, including the revised call. The State, represented by AGA Satyendra Tiwari, was present. The Court …
Smt. Gunjan Mani Tripathi filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 18‑02‑2026 of the District Basic Education Officer directing that respondent No. 5 be appointed officiating Headmaster of Composite Vidyalaya, Deoria, and that the petitioner hand over the charge. The petitioner contended …
The petitioner, Jai Shankar Rai, filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 13456 of 2021) before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared for the petitioner and the case was not marked to indicate that the cause of action still survived. The court had issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 …
The writ petition filed by Azhar Uddin in 2021 remained pending and was listed among the oldest cases for priority hearing. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be taken up and warned that non‑appearance would lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s …
The petitioner Vinita filed a writ petition in 2021 which remained pending without any appearance by her counsel. The High Court had issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard promptly and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel …
The writ petition filed by Ganga Singh against the State of U.P. and others remained pending since 2021. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and dismissed if the parties failed to appear or indicate that the cause of action survived. Neither the petitioner’s …
The petitioner, a former headmaster of a government‑aided junior high school, retired on 30 June 2007 and claimed a gratuity of Rs 3,33,314, of which he had already received Rs 1,07,098. He filed a writ petition seeking the balance of Rs 2,26,616 with interest, alleging that the authorities had not …
The petition filed by C/M Karan Agriculture Junior High School in 2017 sought relief against the State of U.P. and others. The case was listed among the oldest pending matters and a notice was issued that old cases up to 2022 would be heard and dismissed as infructuous if the parties did not appear …
The petitioner Neeraj Kumar filed a writ petition in 2016 before the Allahabad High Court. The case remained pending for several years and was listed among the oldest cases for priority hearing. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be taken up and warned that non‑appearance …
The writ petition filed by Yogendra Kumar Srivastava in 2017 remained pending for several years. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and warned of dismissal if parties failed to appear or indicate that the cause of action survived. Neither the petitioner’s …
The writ petition filed by Deepak Kumar and another in 2017 remained pending for several years. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the case marked to show …
The petitioner, Rakesh Kumar, filed a writ petition in 2018 which remained pending for several years. The High Court had issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard promptly and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor …
The petitioner, Sanjay Kumar Yadav, had earlier obtained a quashing of orders that cancelled his appointment and withheld his salary in Writ A No.13959 of 2019, with the court directing the respondents to pass appropriate orders. In compliance, the respondents issued an order on 17 February 2026 …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2018 before the Allahabad High Court, which remained pending for several years. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and warned that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel …
Fifteen petitioners, all Head Masters in Junior High Schools, filed a writ petition seeking an order directing the District Basic Education Officer to pay them the promotional increment and arrears with interest. The respondents, including the State of Uttar Pradesh and the education officer, …
The petitioner, Ashish, filed Writ Petition No. 6696 of 2026 before the Allahabad High Court. During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel, Dhanraj Singh Yadav, expressed that the petitioner no longer wished to pursue the petition. The petitioner sought dismissal of the petition as "not pressed" and …
Smt. Chandrahas filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the State of U.P. and two other respondents to pay her an ex-gratia amount with interest and to decide a representation she had made on 5 February 2026. The petitioner alleged that the decision on her representation was pending before …
The petitioner, Smt Chandrahas, filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the respondents to continue paying the full family pension of Rs.9,325 per month as per the pension payment order dated 18‑03‑2019. She alleged that the pension amount was reduced without any notice, hearing, or order, and …
The petitioner, Mamta Chandel, filed a writ petition seeking an order directing the respondents to allow her to participate in the counseling and be placed on the merit list for the appointment of Assistant Teachers to 12,460 vacancies advertised on 20-12-2016. The respondents contended that the …
Smt. Badami Devi filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking a mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh and three other respondents to decide a representation dated 07-10-2025. The respondents contended that the petition was not maintainable because there is no statutory provision …
Mst. Ram Sakhi filed writ petition No. 3174 of 1979 before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner when the list was revised. The court noted the absence of the petitioner’s representation and dismissed the petition for want of prosecution. Consequently, any interim …
The petitioners sought a mandamus directing the Director of Pension and Treasury, Uttar Pradesh, to decide their applications for refund of excess pension deductions filed on 7 February 2025 and 20 February 2025 within a stipulated period. The State argued that a government order issued after the …
Smt. Seema Verma filed a writ petition challenging a decision of the State of U.P. and others, alleging that her grievances should be addressed without delay. The respondents argued that the petition was not maintainable because the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Rule 5 of the U.P. Basic …
The petitioner, Murari Yadav, was granted a compassionate appointment to a Class‑IV post after his father's death but sought a transfer to a teaching post on compassionate grounds. He filed a writ petition invoking government orders dated 04‑09‑2000 and 15‑02‑2013, contending that a prior judgment …
The petitioner, Ravish Kumar, filed a writ petition seeking a compassionate appointment to a teaching post after having been appointed to a Class‑IV post following his father's death. He argued that, based on earlier government orders (04‑09‑2000 and 15‑02‑2013) and a precedent (Special Appeal No. …
The petitioner, Kumari Sharmila, a teacher, challenged a punitive transfer and suspension order dated 17 September 2025 issued by the District Basic Education Officer, alleging that it was based on a complaint of forged signatures and was passed without a proper enquiry, violating principles of …
The petitioner, Shiv Narain Singh, was appointed as Shiksha Mitra in 2005 but his appointment was later cancelled by a 2020 judgment. He argued that the experience he gained during his tenure should be counted for bonus marks in the selection for Assistant Teacher vacancies. The Division Bench had …
The petitioner, Smt. Kaushal Agarwal, sought a four‑week extension to file a rejoinder affidavit in Writ‑A No. 20742 of 2024. The High Court, after hearing counsel, granted the requested extension and listed the case for further hearing on 30‑04‑2026. No substantive merits of the writ were addressed …
The petitioner, appointed as an assistant teacher in 1999, sought regular salary and grant‑in‑aid benefits after the school was included in the grant‑in‑aid list in 2006. While other teachers holding B.Ed, L.T., or Moallim qualifications received the benefit, the petitioner, whose qualifications are …
Girja Prasad filed a writ petition (No. 3018 of 1980) before the Allahabad High Court against the D.D.C. and others. The petitioner's counsel list erroneously included Mr. Rakesh Pathak, who was actually counsel for the respondents. The respondents pointed out this mistake, and no counsel appeared …
The petitioner, Shital, filed a writ petition in 1981 before the Allahabad High Court. The matter remained pending for over four decades without any appearance by the petitioner's counsel. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and dismissed if no cause of action …
The petition was originally filed in 1983 and remained pending for over four decades. The High Court issued a notice directing that all old cases up to 2022 be taken up and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner's counsel appeared nor was the case marked …
The petitioner, Girvar Singh, filed a writ petition in 1983 against the Board of Revenue. The case remained pending for over four decades without any appearance by the petitioner’s counsel. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and dismissed if the cause of action no …
The petitioners filed a writ petition in 1983 which remained pending for over four decades. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non-appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither petitioner counsel appeared nor was the case marked to show …
The petitioners filed a writ petition in 1983 which remained pending for over four decades. The High Court issued a notice directing that all old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioners' counsel appeared nor was the case …
The writ petition (Writ‑B No. 1868 of 1983) was filed in 1983 and remained pending for over four decades. No counsel appeared for the petitioners on the scheduled hearing and the case was not marked to indicate that any cause of action survived. The High Court had issued a notice that all old cases …
Shalini Saxena filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 654 of 2021) before the Allahabad High Court challenging actions of the State of Uttar Pradesh and four other respondents. During the proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel submitted that the petition had become infructuous and should be dismissed. The …
The petitioner Surendra Kumar filed a writ petition (Writ‑B No.1384 of 1983) in the Allahabad High Court against D.D.C. and others. The petition remained pending for over four decades without any appearance by the petitioner’s counsel. The court issued a notice directing that all old cases up to …
The petitioner filed Writ‑A No. 562 of 2022 before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and four others. The matter remained pending since 2022 and was listed under the oldest pending cases for a priority hearing. A notice on the court board directed that old cases be …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2016 before the Allahabad High Court, which remained pending for several years. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor …
The petitioner, Shri Prakash Yadav, filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 9016 of 2018) in the Allahabad High Court. The matter remained pending since 2018 and was listed as an old case for priority hearing. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be taken up and warned that …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court in 2021. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and warned that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the petition marked to show that …
The petitioner, Umadatt Sharma, filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 5906 of 2021) in the Allahabad High Court. The matter remained pending since 2021 and was listed under the oldest pending cases for a priority hearing. A notice on the court board warned that old cases up to 2022 would be dismissed as …
The petitioner, Diam Kumar Premi, filed a writ petition in 2021 before the Allahabad High Court. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard promptly and warned that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was …
The petitioner, Chhitar Singh, filed a writ petition in 2001 which remained pending for over two decades. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2021, but neither the petitioner nor his counsel appeared for the hearing. The court had issued a notice that old cases up to 2022 would be heard and dismissed as infructuous if no cause of action survived or the parties failed to appear. Since the petitioner …
The petitioner, Dileep Kumar Gupta, filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 7166 of 2019) before the Allahabad High Court. The matter remained pending since 2019 and was listed among the oldest cases for a priority hearing. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be taken up and …
The petitioner Avinash Kumar Pandey filed a writ petition in 2020 which remained pending for several years. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non-appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. The petitioner’s counsel did not appear and the case …
The petitioners filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 7260 of 2022) in the Allahabad High Court, which has remained pending since 2022. The court issued a notice directing that all old cases up to 2022 be heard in the first round and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither …
The petitioners filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 6280 of 2021) in the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and others. The matter was listed as an old pending case and a notice was issued that any such case not marked as surviving or not appearing would be dismissed as …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2021 which remained pending. The court issued a notice that old cases up to 2022 would be heard and dismissed if the parties did not appear or indicate that the cause of action survived. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the petition marked to …
The petitioner, Saruddin, filed a writ petition (Writ-A No. 6312 of 2021) in the Allahabad High Court which remained pending since 2021. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard promptly and warned that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the …
The petitioner Sunita Singh filed a writ petition in 2020 before the Allahabad High Court. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard promptly and warned that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the case …
The petitioner, Anju Singh, filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 7558 of 2022) before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and five other respondents. The matter had been pending since 2022 and was listed under the oldest pending cases for a priority hearing. A notice on …
The petitioner, Indrajeet Singh Yadav, filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 7554 of 2022) before the Allahabad High Court. The court had issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard promptly and warned that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2020 seeking relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh and others. The case remained pending for several years and no counsel appeared for the petitioner at the scheduled hearing. The court had issued a notice that old cases up to 2022 would be heard and …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2021 which remained pending. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and warned of dismissal as infructuous if parties did not appear or indicate that the cause of action survived. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared …
The petitioners filed a writ petition in 2020 which remained pending for several years. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the case marked to …
The petitioner, Nagma Parveen, filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 8028 of 2022) in the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two other respondents. The matter had been pending since 2022 and was listed under the oldest pending cases for a priority hearing. The …
Manju Yadav filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 7799 of 2022) against the State of Uttar Pradesh and three other respondents. The petition was presented by counsel Arvind Kumar, Kartikeya Saran and Kushmondeya Shahi, while the respondents were represented by Avneesh Tripathi, C.S.C. and Shyam Krishna …
The petitioners filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 8008 of 2022) before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two other respondents. The matter had been pending since 2022 and was listed under the oldest pending cases for a priority hearing. The court issued a …
The petitioner, Ram Het Gautam, filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 8153 of 2022) before the Allahabad High Court. The court had issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard promptly and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel …
The writ petition filed by Raghuray in 2020 remained pending without any appearance by the petitioner’s counsel. The High Court had issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be taken up and dismissed as infructuous if no appearance was made. The petitioner’s counsel did not appear nor mark …
The petitioner, Sabah Uddin, filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 8058 of 2022) before the Allahabad High Court. The case was listed as an old pending matter and a notice was issued that such cases would be heard and dismissed as infructuous if the parties did not appear or indicate that the cause of …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2020 which remained pending without any appearance by counsel. The court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. The petitioner’s counsel did not appear nor mark the case to …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2021 which remained pending. The High Court issued a notice that old cases up to 2022 would be heard and dismissed if the parties did not appear or indicate that the cause of action survived. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the case marked to …
The petitioners filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 7446 of 2021) in the Allahabad High Court, which remained pending since 2021. The court issued a notice directing that all old cases up to 2022 be taken up and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. The petitioners' counsel did …
The petition filed in 2020 before the Allahabad High Court remained pending without any appearance by the petitioner’s counsel. The court had issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. The petitioner’s counsel did not …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2008 which remained pending for many years. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the case marked to show …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2018 which remained pending for several years. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and warned of dismissal if the cause of action no longer existed or counsel failed to appear. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2016 which remained pending for several years. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and warned that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the case marked …
The petitioners filed a writ petition in 2011 which remained pending for over a decade. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioners nor their counsel appeared, nor was the case …
The petitioner, Ishwari Prasad, filed a writ petition in 2016 before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh and six other respondents. The case was listed as an old pending matter and a notice was issued that all cases pending up to 2022 must be taken up in the …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2016 which remained pending for several years. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non-appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the case marked to show …
A writ petition filed in 2016 by Vinod Kumar against the State of U.P. and three others remained pending for several years. The High Court listed the matter among the oldest pending cases and issued a notice requiring the petitioner’s counsel to appear or to mark that the cause of action still …
The writ petition filed by Mahesh Lal Yadav and others in 2019 remained pending for several years. The High Court issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be taken up and warned that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. The petitioners' counsel neither appeared nor …
The writ petition filed by Durga Singh and others in 2018 remained pending without any appearance by the petitioners. The High Court had issued a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be taken up and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. The petitioners neither appeared …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2018 before the Allahabad High Court. The case was listed as an old pending matter and a notice was issued that such cases would be heard and dismissed as infructuous if no appearance was made. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the case marked …
