CourtKutchehry.com
High Courts

Tirath Raj Verma vs State of U.P.and Others

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 11 May 1999 · Citation: (1999) 05 AHC CK 0128

HON’BLE JUDGES
Binod Kumar Roy, J and D.R.Chaudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 19382 of 1999
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 204 words
1.

The petitioner has come up with a prayer to command respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to cancel the licence of fair price shop of Respondent No. 5.

2.

Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner we are afraid that we cannot issue such a desired writ unless the petitioner makes specific prayer before the authority concerned and/or if such a prayer has been made, then the authorities are request to adjudicate that prayer first.

3.

We, accordingly, dismiss this writ petition with this direction that if in fact the petitioner has made such a prayer, which was remained undisposed of, then the authority concerned before whom such a grievance has been made, is required to dispose it of objectively by assigning reasons expeditiously preferably within two months from today.

4.

Before parting it is clarified that this order shall not be interpreted to mean by any one that this Court has expressed itself in regard to merit of the grievance made by the petitioner against respondent No. 6.

6.

The office is directed to hand over a copy of this order to Sri P.K. Bisaria, learned Standing Counsel within one week for its intimation to and follow up action by the concerned respondent.