Allahabad High Court
WRIC/33899/2026 of KRISH DHANGAR AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS on 5 October 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 33899 of 2026 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J. HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 25.07.2026 passed by the Tehsildar, Tehsil Mahavan, District Mathura rejecting the petitioners' application for the grant of
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 33899 of 2026
Court No. - 2
HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J.
HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 25.07.2026 passed by the Tehsildar, Tehsil Mahavan, District Mathura rejecting the petitioners' application for the grant of a caste certificate.
2. Admit.
3. Heard Sri Vivek Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the State.
4. Learned Standing Counsel waives opportunity to file a return in view of the order that we propose to pass and earlier orders relating to similar challenges raised to refusal of caste certificate.
5. The petitioners applied for the grant of a scheduled caste certificate which went before the Tehsildar, Tehsil Mahavan, respondent no. 3. The application was made in the prescribed proforma. A perusal of the impugned order dated 25.07.2026 shows that it is a rejection recorded in a printed proforma without assigning any reasons. The order is utterly cryptic and laconic. The petitioners' case is that they were not afforded any opportunity of hearing and a perusal of the order to its face shows that indeed the petitioners were not heard. There is no expression even by remote mention which may suggest that the petitioners were ever heard in the matter before the impugned order was passed. Natural justice has, as one of its principle facets, the right to be heard for the man against whom the decision adversely affecting his interest may be taken. Any order that Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Janardan Yadav, Vivek Kumar Pal Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Krish Dhangar And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of Up And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
has adverse civil consequences must be preceded by hearing. This is wanting in the present case. Also, the absence of reasons in the impugned order makes the order vulnerable on the touchstone of natural justice. It is also a requirement of natural justice that any Authority taking a decision affecting rights of citizen must mention briefly the reasons for the conclusion. The complete absence of reasons also leads to violation of the principles of natural justice.
6. In the circumstances, we cannot sustain the order passed by the Tehsildar, Mahavan, Mathura. In result, this petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated 25.07.2026 is hereby quashed. The Tehsildar, Mahavan, Mathura is ordered to pass a fresh order on the self same application, as earlier made by the petitioners, of course, after granting an opportunity of hearing and recording reasons. If there is any deficiency in the petitioners' application, the Tehsildar will give opportunity to the petitioners to make it good before he makes his order.
7. There shall be no order as to costs. October 6, 2026 gp WRIC No. 33899 of 2026 2 (Vivek Saran,J.) (J.J. Munir,J.) Digitally signed by :- GANESH PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad