WAQF TEELA DARGAH MAKHDOOM SHAH VILAYAT vs STATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS — WRIC/3319/2026

Next hearing: 10th March 2026.

Next hearing 10-Mar-2026

CNR: UPHC010337942026

Filing Number

WRIC/

Filing Date

17-Jan-2026

Registration No

WRIC/3319/2026

Registration Date

24-Jan-2026

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

MISC. WRITS (NOT COVERED UNDER ANY OTHER HEAD) ( 380000 )

Sub-Category

WRIT PETITIONS RELATING TO WAQF BOARD ( 4 )

Judicial Branch

Civil WRITS

Last updated 05-Jul-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.WAQF TEELA DARGAH MAKHDOOM SHAH VILAYAT

    Adv. MOHAMMED IFTEKHAR,MOHAMMAD HISHAM QADEER,MOHAMMAD HISHAM QADEER, ,MOHAMMAD HISHAM QADEER

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS

    Adv. ,C.S.C. 1123

  2. 2.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

    Adv. C.S.C.

  3. 3.SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, TEHSIL BARAUT

    Adv. C.S.C.

  4. 4.SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

    Adv. C.S.C.

  5. 5.JAIVEER TYAGI

    Adv. C.S.C.

  6. 6.AADESH

    Adv. C.S.C.

  7. 7.RAJPAL SINGH

    Adv. C.S.C.

  8. 8.VIJAYPAL SINGH

    Adv. C.S.C.

Case History

  1. 10-Mar-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 10-Mar-2026

    Sudhanshu Chauhan , Saral Srivastava

  3. 13-Feb-2026

    Sudhanshu Chauhan,saral SrivastavaView PDF

    The writ petition by Waqf Teela Dargah Makhdoom Shah Vilayat against the State of U.P. and others was heard on February 13, 2026, before the Allahabad High Court. The case was adjourned and listed for hearing in ordinary course as the petitioner's counsel was absent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 13-Feb-2026

    Garima Prashad , Neeraj Tiwari

  5. 06-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 17-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WRIC/3319/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The writ petition by Waqf Teela Dargah Makhdoom Shah Vilayat against the State of U.P. and others was heard on February 13, 2026, before the Allahabad High Court. The case was adjourned and listed for hearing in ordinary course as the petitioner's counsel was absent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case