SANJEEV TRIPATHI vs STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS — WPIL/602/2026

Disposed: -- on 18th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UPHC011045522026

Filing Number

WPIL/

Filing Date

17-Feb-2026

Registration No

WPIL/602/2026

Registration Date

27-Feb-2026

Judge

Mahesh Chandra Tripathi , Kunal Ravi Singh

Coram

Mahesh Chandra Tripathi , Kunal Ravi Singh

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION ( 370000 )

Sub-Category

MISCELLANEOUS ( 90 )

Judicial Branch

Civil WRITS

Decision Date

18-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

--

Last updated 30-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SANJEEV TRIPATHI

    Adv. VARUN KUMAR CHAUBEY,ASHOK KUMAR UPADHYAY,ASHOK KUMAR UPADHYAY, ,YASHARTH UPADHYAY,ASHOK KUMAR UPADHYAY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

    Adv. ,C.S.C. 1123

  2. 2.DIRECTOR GENERAL (MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES)

    Adv. C.S.C.

  3. 3.DIRECTOR PARAMEDICAL (MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES)

    Adv. C.S.C.

  4. 4.CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER

    Adv. C.S.C.

  5. 5.AJAY KUMAR MISHRA

    Adv. C.S.C.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Mar-2026

    Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,kunal Ravi SinghView PDF

    The High Court of Allahabad dismissed Sanjeev Tripathi's Public Interest Litigation as not maintainable, holding that PIL in service matters lacks locus standi and is not a proper remedy. The petitioner, an elected panchayat member, had sought the transfer of a Chief Pharmacist and action against alleged misconduct; however, the court found the petition bordered on PIL in service matters, which is impermissible, and noted the petitioner had no personal interest. With the petitioner's counsel conceding the point, the petition was dismissed as "not pressed" on March 18, 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Mar-2026

    —

    Arun Bhansali , Kshitij Shailendra

  4. 17-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPIL/602/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Allahabad dismissed Sanjeev Tripathi's Public Interest Litigation as not maintainable, holding that PIL in service matters lacks locus standi and is not a proper remedy. The petitioner, an elected panchayat member, had sought the transfer of a Chief Pharmacist and action against alleged misconduct; however, the court found the petition bordered on PIL in service matters, which is impermissible, and noted the petitioner had no personal interest. With the petitioner's counsel conceding the point, the petition was dismissed as "not pressed" on March 18, 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case