COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT STANDARD EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY MAUAIMA AND 2 OTHERS vs ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, FIRMS SOCIETIES AND CHITS, PRAYAGRAJ AND 2 OTHERS — WRIC/9899/2026
Disposed: -- on 24th March 2026.
CNR: UPHC011464502026
Filing Number
WRIC/
Filing Date
11-Mar-2026
Registration No
WRIC/9899/2026
Registration Date
12-Mar-2026
Judge
Anish Kumar Gupta
Coram
Anish Kumar Gupta
Bench Type
Single Bench
Judicial Branch
Civil WRITS
Decision Date
24-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
--
Last updated 30-Jun-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT STANDARD EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY MAUAIMA AND 2 OTHERS
Adv. ADARSH SINGH,MAHENDRA KUMAR,MAHENDRA KUMAR, ,Sr. Advocate,MAHENDRA KUMAR
-
2.NURAL ISLAM
Adv. MAHENDRA KUMAR Sr. Advocate
-
3.AYAZ AHMAD
Adv. MAHENDRA KUMAR Sr. Advocate
Respondent(s)
-
1.ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, FIRMS SOCIETIES AND CHITS, PRAYAGRAJ AND 2 OTHERS
Adv. PRADEEP KUMAR UPADHYAY,C.S.C. 1123
-
2.STATE OF U.P. THROUGH ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY (SECONDARY EDUCATION)
Adv. C.S.C. PRADEEP KUMAR UPADHYAY
-
3.ALLEGED COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT STANDARD EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY MAUAIMA, PRAYAGRAJ THROUGH ITS ALLEGED
Adv. C.S.C. PRADEEP KUMAR UPADHYAY
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
24-Mar-2026
—
Kshitij Shailendra
-
17-Mar-2026
Kshitij ShailendraView PDF
This is a preliminary hearing order, not a final judgment. The High Court of Allahabad admitted the writ petition and scheduled it for fresh hearing on 24.03.2026, directing proper service of the petition on all respondents and registering respondent No.3's counsel. The court imposed a restriction preventing adjournment at respondent No.3's instance at the next hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
11-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WRIC/9899/2026
This is a preliminary hearing order, not a final judgment. The High Court of Allahabad admitted the writ petition and scheduled it for fresh hearing on 24.03.2026, directing proper service of the petition on all respondents and registering respondent No.3's counsel. The court imposed a restriction preventing adjournment at respondent No.3's instance at the next hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts