Allahabad High Court
WRIA/14268/2026 of SAHAB SINGH YADAV Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS on 15 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 14268 of 2026 Court No. - 33 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the daughter
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 14268 of 2026
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, 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, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and perused the record.
2. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the daughter of the petitioner is studying in Class-IX and the petitioner has been transferred from Prayagraj to Etawah by the order dated 21.5.2026. It has been further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that as per the letter dated 21st November, 2016 of the Director General of Police the appropriate authority can permit the transferred employee to retain the house in case his son or daughter are studying in Class IX or XIth. It has also been submitted that in this regard petitioner has already moved a representation before Respondent No.2 which is pending consideration. By the order impugned dated 25.8.2026 petitioner has been directed to vacate the house allotted to the petitioner.
3. Since the petitioner has already represented before the respondent no.2, it would be appropriate that the Respondent No.2 shall pass an order in accordance with law within a period of four weeks.
4. Till the order is passed by respondent no.2 on the representation of the petitioner, the petitioner may not be compelled to vacate the house in question. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dhananjay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Sahab Singh Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
5. With the aforesaid direction the writ petition is disposed of. September 16, 2026 Kumar Manish WRIA No. 14268 of 2026 2 (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad