Allahabad High Court
WRIC/38679/2026 of CHANDRVOSH Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 23 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 38679 of 2026 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State. 2. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the prayer
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 38679 of 2026
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, 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. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State.
2. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the prayer to direct the respondent no.2-Branch Manager, H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd., Bulandshahr to withdraw his notice dated 23.05.2026 and issue a fresh notice by mentioning correct statement with interest.
3. It is argued by Ms. Kirti Sharma, Advocate, holding brief of Sri R. K. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 that in case petitioner will submit an application in this regard before the respondent no.2 raising his grievances as has been raised in the present case, the respondent no.2 will consider the same in accordance with law.
4. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.
5. In the facts and circumstances, petitioner is permitted to submit an application/representation raising his grievances as has been raised in the present writ petition before the respondent no.2 along-with certified copy of this order within a period of two weeks from today. If such a representation is made, the respondent no.2 is directed to pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a further period of three weeks. If it is found that there are certain discrepancies in the recovery certification, Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dharmendra Kumar, Radhey Shyam Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Chandrvosh .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s)
the fresh recovery certificate should be issued immediately thereafter.
6. With the aforesaid observations, present writ petition is disposed of finally.
7. Since the writ petition has been decided on an exparte version without seeking any response from the respondents, thus passing of the order today may not be construed to an expression that this Court has gone into the merits of the matter and the second respondent shall accord independent consideration strictly in accordance with law and the mandate of law holding the field.
September 24, 2026 Pramod Tripathi WRIC No. 38679 of 2026 2 (Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad