CHANDRASEN AND ANOTHER vs STATE OF U.P. AND 15 OTHERS — WRIB/1132/2026
Disposed: -- on 19th March 2026.
CNR: UPHC011439162026
Filing Number
WRIB/
Filing Date
11-Mar-2026
Registration No
WRIB/1132/2026
Registration Date
14-Mar-2026
Judge
Dinesh Pathak
Coram
Dinesh Pathak
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS ( 100100 )
Sub-Category
( 23 )
Judicial Branch
Civil WRITS
Decision Date
19-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
--
Last updated 30-Jun-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.CHANDRASEN AND ANOTHER
Adv. MANOJ KUMAR YADAV,ANIL MISHRA,ANIL MISHRA, ,ANIL MISHRA
-
2.INDRASAN
Adv. ANIL MISHRA
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF U.P. AND 15 OTHERS
Adv. ,C.S.C. 1123
-
2.DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION,
Adv. C.S.C.
-
3.ISIMDAR
Adv. C.S.C.
-
4.JAMALUDDIN
Adv. C.S.C.
-
5.TAUHID
Adv. C.S.C.
-
6.SAFIK
Adv. C.S.C.
-
7.ATEEK
Adv. C.S.C.
-
8.DEEPCHAND
Adv. C.S.C.
-
9.DANISH
Adv. C.S.C.
-
10.ISHTEKHAR
Adv. C.S.C.
-
11.MOHD. ZUBAIR
Adv. C.S.C.
-
12.MOHD. OZAIR
Adv. C.S.C.
-
13.TAUSIF
Adv. C.S.C.
-
14.IZHAR
Adv. C.S.C.
-
15.EHSAAN
Adv. C.S.C.
-
16.KAPIL DEV
Adv. C.S.C.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
19-Mar-2026
Dinesh PathakView PDF
The High Court of Allahabad directed the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Azamgarh to expeditiously decide a pending land consolidation revision case (Revision No. 3191 of 2024) under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act within four months, in accordance with law and after affording fair hearing to parties. The court disposed of the writ petition without commenting on merits, as the Standing Counsel consented to the direction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
11-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WRIB/1132/2026
The High Court of Allahabad directed the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Azamgarh to expeditiously decide a pending land consolidation revision case (Revision No. 3191 of 2024) under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act within four months, in accordance with law and after affording fair hearing to parties. The court disposed of the writ petition without commenting on merits, as the Standing Counsel consented to the direction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts